Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,473 Year: 3,730/9,624 Month: 601/974 Week: 214/276 Day: 54/34 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Underlying Philosophy
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 6 of 577 (553311)
04-02-2010 5:53 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by sac51495
04-02-2010 5:06 PM


sac51495 writes:
I would like to propose a topic centering on the underlying philosophy of atheism, primarily, what is an atheists fundamental starting point,
What is the underlying philosophy of atheism? None.
What is an atheist's fundamental starting point? Birth.
sac51495 writes:
To be more specific, does the starting point for atheism account for all the abstract entities that we know are present, such as the laws of logic, morals, ethics, and other such entities.
No.
sac writes:
Further, how could these entities arise in a universe that is not governed by God?
One doesn't need to know that or have any opinion on it in order to be an atheist. You managed fine before you first heard of the idea of a god, and before you started to believe in one.
sac writes:
So, the basic question is: from where did abstract entities arise,......
In my opinion (I can't speak for other atheists) laws of logic, ethics and morals are made by us.
and why do you believe in these entities? This question is, of course, directed towards atheists.
Because we've made them, therefore they exist in the sense that ideas exist. Did you mean "believe" or "agree"?
But the most important point is that there isn't an "underlying philosophy of atheism" itself. Different atheists may have very different philosophies, or no philosophy at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by sac51495, posted 04-02-2010 5:06 PM sac51495 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by sac51495, posted 04-02-2010 11:13 PM bluegenes has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 83 of 577 (553469)
04-03-2010 11:46 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by sac51495
04-02-2010 11:13 PM


Divine right of monarchs!
sac51495 writes:
Thank you for making this distinction, as some atheists will talk about what they believe, but you start from the point of "agreeing".
I notice that you live in the U.K., and I will then say it is safe to assume that you are, perhaps, a relatively law-abiding citizen of the U.K. From where does the U.K. get the authority to lay out a set of morals as the law of the land, if there are, perhaps, some people in the U.K. who disagree with this set of morals?
In the old days, Christian monarchs would lay down laws based on the claim that they ruled by divine right. In other words, they did what they wanted to do, and presented a supernatural justification for it. In the present, we decide what we want as the law of the land by discussion, argument, and consensus agreement. The approximate average view of the population is the authority, and this is recognised as always imperfect and ever changing.
How can you say that if you punish a person who believes that murder is a good thing, that you are establishing justice, when in reality you are punishing this person for what is in their opinion a good thing?
We don't punish people for a belief that murder is a good thing, we just punish people who do it, whatever their beliefs. It's practical, and diminishes the chances of ourselves, our families and our friends being victims. That's probably the underlying reason that we censure most types of killing and make them illegal, and describe them as "immoral". Enlightened self-interest.
sac writes:
You may reply that the majority of the people in England believe in the particular set of morals which say that murder is wrong. This makes sense at first, but then I will ask further, where does the moral come from that says one set of morals can rule over another set of morals?
There isn't one, unless we make it up, and regard democracy as being "morally right". We don't need to do that, and can just point out that it's practical. The ruling Christian monarchs and feudal Lords claimed that there was one such moral (divine right).
You claim that there is a source to morals, the Biblical God, but most people in this country would consider genocide and the practice of stoning people to death for collecting firewood to be the behavioral symptoms of criminal psychopathy, so we have no use for the god of Moses.
Here are some interesting questions for you to reflect on:
Which country in the industrialized "western" world has the highest rate of belief in the Christian God?
Which country in the industrialized "western" world has the highest murder rate?
Which country in all the world has the highest proportion of its population in prison?
Which country in all the world has the largest number of delusional evangelists who would like to tell the rest of the world what to believe and how they should behave?
When you've got the answer(s), I hope that you'll find them thought provoking.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by sac51495, posted 04-02-2010 11:13 PM sac51495 has not replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 156 of 577 (555681)
04-14-2010 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by sac51495
04-14-2010 8:54 AM


sac51495 writes:
My primary argument here is that atheism itself is highly inadequate to describe the world around us.
Atheism, like all things that are not descriptions of the world around us, is definitely inadequate as a description of the world around us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by sac51495, posted 04-14-2010 8:54 AM sac51495 has not replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 377 of 577 (565266)
06-15-2010 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 374 by MatterWave
06-15-2010 5:24 PM


Unknown underlying philosophy.
MatterWave writes:
"We don't know" once a year wouldn't hurt anyone, and i presume wouldn't ruin the atheist philosophy.
I'm an atheist, and I don't know what "the atheist philosophy" is. Can you enlighten me?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by MatterWave, posted 06-15-2010 5:24 PM MatterWave has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 378 by MatterWave, posted 06-15-2010 6:28 PM bluegenes has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 380 of 577 (565275)
06-15-2010 6:44 PM
Reply to: Message 378 by MatterWave
06-15-2010 6:28 PM


Re: Unknown underlying philosophy.
MatterWave writes:
Then you are not an atheist.
Which gods do I believe in?
Or are you an atheist that doesn't know why he is an atheist?
I might have some ideas as to why, but it doesn't actually require a reason to be an atheist. I was born that way. Belief in anything requires a reason. Disbelief is the starting point, don't you agree?
I was picking up on your phrase "the atheist philosophy". It relates to the subject of this thread. I don't think there is a philosophy that all atheists share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 378 by MatterWave, posted 06-15-2010 6:28 PM MatterWave has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 382 by MatterWave, posted 06-15-2010 6:48 PM bluegenes has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 385 of 577 (565284)
06-15-2010 6:59 PM
Reply to: Message 382 by MatterWave
06-15-2010 6:48 PM


Re: Unknown underlying philosophy.
MatterWave writes:
You don't believe in god, that's your philosophy.
No, it isn't my philosophy. I wasn't born philosophising, was I? Was that what you meant by "the atheist philosophy"? You could have just said "atheism" if that's what you meant.
Do you believe in fairies? If you don't, is your non-belief in fairies your philosophy?
It's surely easy to understand that it requires no philosophising to lack a belief in any supernatural beings for whose existence you have no evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 382 by MatterWave, posted 06-15-2010 6:48 PM MatterWave has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 386 by MatterWave, posted 06-16-2010 2:03 AM bluegenes has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2499 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 388 of 577 (565324)
06-16-2010 3:36 AM
Reply to: Message 386 by MatterWave
06-16-2010 2:03 AM


Re: Unknown underlying philosophy.
MatterWave writes:
No, it's not just lack of belief. You are not an agnostic, you are an atheist. If i asked you - "Does God exist?" you'd answer "No" which is a proactive belief that god doesn't exist. And that's your philosophy.
I wouldn't answer "No". Please don't make things up. If you asked me "Do you believe in a god (or gods)", I would say "no".
If you ask me "does god exist", I would say "I don't know, but I don't believe in any gods", and I would probably ask you which god you were talking about, as there are many, so "does god exist" sounds like a strange question to me.
I would say that because it is impossible to conclusively know that gods don't exist. Obviously. If they don't, how could we tell?
But let me explain about someone's philosophy. I don't believe that the Koran is the word of god, and I'll assume here that you don't. If a Muslim described "not believing in the Koran as the word of god" as our philosophy, he would be wrong.
We don't have to philosophise ourselves into the original state of not believing in any particular supernatural suggestions. It's the norm, and it's how we start off life.
It is belief in such things which is active, not disbelief.
It's common for people from mono-theistic cultures (even many non-believers) to get this the wrong way around when discussing whatever it is they call "god".
I'm away for a couple of days, but if you disagree with me, I'll explain in more detail, as this is an important misconception that we see elsewhere on this thread and frequently on EvC.
Cheers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by MatterWave, posted 06-16-2010 2:03 AM MatterWave has 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