Fear of Atheism

[Into the Night]

Sure, in your atheistic worldview,

I'm not an atheist, Sybil.

in a universe of blind physical forces there is no justice,

There certainly is. Try to break physical laws and see how far you get!

there is no good, there is no evil. Things just happen.

There is both good and evil, Sybil.

And only if they are motivated to choose,

The freedom of choice does not require motivation. You are free to choose. You are NOT free of the consequences of that choice.

every individual or culture has to create their own subjective reality.

Just individuals. Cultures don't have a reality.

 

[Cypress]

I'm not an atheist, Sybil.

There certainly is. Try to break physical laws and see how far you get!

There is both good and evil, Sybil.

The freedom of choice does not require motivation. You are free to choose. You are NOT free of the consequences of that choice.

Just individuals. Cultures don't have a reality.

This is a topic an atheist moral relativist like you can really sink your teeth into:

Can Evolution Account for Morality?​

Evolution fundamentally is about survival of the fittest​

Chemistry, molecules, and molecular biology are not moral agents.

Evolution is descriptive not prescriptive, and describes what does survive, not what ought to survive. Why should humans survive?

Should we murder the weak to help others survive?

Should we cull the gene pool by eliminating the disabled and help the fit survive?

Why "cooperate" when not cooperating often helps you to survive?

Should we rape to survive and propagate our genes?

Since evolution is a process of change, then morals must change. Will rape one day be "good"?

 

[Cypress]

There is both good and evil, Sybil.

Not according to an atheist like you. You asserted there is no objective truth about morality, that there is no absolute right and wrong.

Only atheists, secular materialists, and existentialists tend to believe that.

In a universe of blind physical forces, there is no good and evil, no absolute right and wrong. Shit just happens.

The French atheist Albert Camus had the integrity to live his atheism to it's logical conclusion, something you aren't prepared to do. Camus thought atheists typically end up realizing their worldview renders the world without inherent meaning, but then turn around and make up meaning. Camus thought that was inauthentic.

So you need to get your story straight on good and evil.

 

[gmark77]

Yours is the true religion huh?

Nope.

You need a urologist to tell you when to take a piss don't you?

Nope. But people who think they need God to tell them that murder is wrong might be.

 

[Yakuda]

Nope.



Nope. But people who think they need God to tell them that murder is wrong might be.

Yep. Look how you respond. It's hilarious

There is no atheistic reason to not murder. Bet yuy have your urologist on speed dial.huh?

 

[gmark77]

There is no atheistic reason to not murder.

Sure there is. It's pretty easy, in fact.

We are animals that live in large groups, like ants or dogs. If there was a member of our group that was busy murdering other members of the group it would endanger us and the stability of our group. So murder is wrong for us.

Now it is the people who say "I can't think of any reason not to murder someone so hopefully some imaginary being tells me not to." that I think are the scariest.

They have done horrible things over the centuries in the name of their god.

 

[Yakuda]

Sure there is. It's pretty easy, in fact.

We are animals that live in large groups, like ants or dogs. If there was a member of our group that was busy murdering other members of the group it would endanger us and the stability of our group. So murder is wrong for us.

Now it is the people who say "I can't think of any reason not to murder someone so hopefully some imaginary being tells me not to." that I think are the scariest.

They have done horrible things over the centuries in the name of their god.

No its not wrong to murder it just "endangers us and the stability of our group." If not for that you couldn't oppose murder. If murder strengthened and allowed the group to accumulate power you couldn't oppose it for the reasons you stated.

 

[gmark77]

No its not wrong to murder it just "endangers us and the stability of our group." If not for that you couldn't oppose murder. If murder strengthened and allowed the group to accumulate power you couldn't oppose it for the reasons you stated.

So why is murder wrong in YOUR world?

Is it literally just because someone told you it was wrong? That's pretty weak tea...but if it keeps you on the straight and narrow I guess that's the best we can hope for.

Fingers crossed God never tells you to do something bad.

 

[Yakuda]

So why is murder wrong in YOUR world?

Is it literally just because someone told you it was wrong? That's pretty weak tea...but if it keeps you on the straight and narrow I guess that's the best we can hope for.

Fingers crossed God never tells you to do something bad.

First at least you acknowledge you have no legitimate reason from an atheistic standpoint to oppose murder.

From my perspective murder is wrong because each person has intrinsic value simple because they were created by God and as such are entitled to care and protection.

I have always been pro-ife but used to be pro-death penalty until I realIzed the moral and intellectual inconsistency.

Just like you atheists any bad I do is my choice not God telling me.

 

[gmark77]

From my perspective murder is wrong because each person has intrinsic value simple because they were created by God and as such are entitled to care and protection.

You are very close to my view, but for me people's intrinsic value comes from my understanding that we are mutually our brothers keeper.

I have always been pro-ife but used to be pro-death penalty until I realIzed the moral and intellectual inconsistency.

So you weren't always "pro-life".

 

[Yakuda]

You are very close to my view, but for me people's intrinsic value comes from my understanding that we are mutually our brothers keeper.




So you weren't always "pro-life".

A decidedly religious concept.

Not in a consistent manner but I possess the capacity and willingness to change my world view as needed to be morally and intellectually consistent.

 

[gmark77]

A decidedly religious concept.

It is only "religious" if one has to have an external God commanding that which is good vs evil.

Atheists can and do recognize good and evil, it's just that it has a real-world REASON for being so, not simply the decree of on-high.

Not in a consistent manner but I possess the capacity and willingness to change my world view as needed to be morally and intellectually consistent.

Why would you change your views? If you are working off the commands of God then surely you have absolutely all the information you would ever need. Why would your "world view" ever change? God doesn't change does He?

 

[Yakuda]

It is only "religious" if one has to have an external God commanding that which is good vs evil.

Atheists can and do recognize good and evil, it's just that it has a real-world REASON for being so, not simply the decree of on-high.



Why would you change your views? If you are working off the commands of God then surely you have absolutely all the information you would ever need. Why would your "world view" ever change? God doesn't change does He?

Mankind is a poor judge of good and evil, even you atheists. If history doesn't tech you that then nothing will.

For the reason stated above. Humans are very bad a deciding what's good and evil. Keep up God didn't change I did. It makes the point but you don't seem interested in listening.

 

[gmark77]

Mankind is a poor judge of good and evil, even you atheists. If history doesn't tech you that then nothing will.

Yet mankind is literally the only route through which you learn God's commands.

HUMANS wrote to tell you what God said was good and evil.

This is why, for instance, the Church had such an easy time of murder in the crusades. In the name of God they murdered people explicitly.

Clearly "religious morality" is just as fungible as you think atheist morality is, perhaps even moreso because all you have is the word of other people.

 

[Cypress]

A decidedly religious concept.

Not in a consistent manner but I possess the capacity and willingness to change my world view as needed to be morally and intellectually consistent.

Good and evil, absolute right and wrong do not exist in a universe of blind physical forces. Shit just happens, and humans have to create their own value system, assuming they even care to.

Murder to Stalin and Mao was a very good and advantageous way to live a flourishing life. They and their inner circle did quite well with lives based on murder.
Murder to Reverend Martin Luther King was objectively evil.

The 20th century's most famous atheist Albert Camus stated that atheists ultimately realize the universe has no inherent meaning, and they have to turn around and borrow religious values, just stripping them of their religious context.

Camus and the other existential atheists thought that was inauthentic, and they insisted that people had to recognize there was no objective moral truth and that individuals have to create their own value system.

 

[Yakuda]

Yet mankind is literally the only route through which you learn God's commands.

HUMANS wrote to tell you what God said was good and evil.

This is why, for instance, the Church had such an easy time of murder in the crusades. In the name of God they murdered people explicitly.

Clearly "religious morality" is just as fungible as you think atheist morality is, perhaps even moreso because all you have is the word of other people.

No not really. Even slave owners didn't want to be slaves themselves.

Th truth is atheism has no moral compass but just a utilitarian view of human life. You have no legitimate reason to oppose murder as has already been pointed out to you. If it suits the purposes of the group to killer others then you have no legitimate reason to say it's wrong.

 

[Yakuda]

Good and evil, absolute right and wrong do not exist in a universe of blind physical forces. Shit just happens, and humans have to create their own value system, assuming they even care to.

Murder to Stalin and Mao was a very good and advantageous way to live a flourishing life. They and their inner circle did quite well with lives based on murder.
Murder to Reverend Martin Luther King was objectively evil.

The 20th century's most famous atheist Albert Camus stated that atheists ultimately realize the universe has no inherent meaning, and they have to turn around and borrow religious values, just stripping them of their religious context.

Camus and the other existential atheists thought that was inauthentic, and they insisted that people had to recognize there was no objective moral truth and that individuals have to create their own value system.

Ok then you have no standard by which to tell me murder is wrong. I can accept that.

 

[Cypress]

Ok then you have no standard by which to tell me murder is wrong. I can accept that.

That's not what I said. I am on record believing there is objective morality and absolute right and wrong.

I am riffing off your claim that even atheists have to borrow religious concepts to establish a concept of absolute right and wrong. That's probably correct.
In a strictly materialistic universe, there is no good or evil, and murder and rape are not objectively wrong. Many humans have flourished and gotten enormous advantage by embracing murder and eschewing cooperation with anyone outside their inner circle.

 

[gmark77]

No not really. Even slave owners didn't want to be slaves themselves.

That's another example where God seemed to drop the ball. The Bible is largely silent to slightly positive toward slavery (with the exception of slavery of the Israelites, that was clearly bad, but the other slaves seemed to be OK).

Th truth is atheism has no moral compass but just a utilitarian view of human life. You have no legitimate reason to oppose murder as has already been pointed out to you. If it suits the purposes of the group to killer others then you have no legitimate reason to say it's wrong.

If you simply ignore what is said to you then you will surely win all arguments.

 

[Yakuda]

That's another example where God seemed to drop the ball. The Bible is largely silent to slightly positive toward slavery (with the exception of slavery of the Israelites, that was clearly bad, but the other slaves seemed to be OK).



If you simply ignore what is said to you then you will surely win all arguments.

I'm not here to "win" an argument I'm merely pointing out that there is nothing in the atheistic world view that says slavery is wrong.