Pages:
Author

Topic: Why do Atheists Hate Religion? - page 6. (Read 901370 times)

hero member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 645
May 14, 2019, 12:11:57 PM
^^^ Actually, the moral code written in the Koran and Hadiths has no place in the world now, or ever in the past. It was something perpetrated by Satan to destroy the work of the real God. The god of Islam is Satan.

Cool

Well, god himself killed a ton of people, satan? Not so many, it almost seems like Satan is better than a God who creates people to simply wipe them out eventually, knowing beforehand he would do so, pointless, an all powerful and knowing being would simply not do that, it's illogical.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
May 14, 2019, 10:47:29 AM

You clearly do not understand my position.  I do not have a choice.

My brain does not allow me to accept things that cannot be validated by science.  My epistemology is based on that.

^^ How does anyone know if all of the things that science has not validated can be scientifically validated? Do you have scientific validation that you do not have a choice without scientific validation?

The things that science cannot explain, I am ok with simply not knowing.

^^ If you don't have scientific validation for the idea that you only have choice with scientific validation, you don't really know if you only have scientifically validated choice. But you said that you only have scientifically validated choice, above.

You think I have made this choice but I am telling you I do not make choices to know what is true and what is not.

Things are true or false without me choosing them.


^^ Has it been scientifically validated that things are true or false without you choosing them? Quantum Entanglement suggests otherwise.

You have a choice, actually infinite number of them, you are limited only by your imagination, I, on the other hand, am confined to what science can discover and validate.

^^ Has science validated that you exist? If it hasn't, you may not be able to choose anything, scientifically validated or not... especially that someone else has some choices.

In a way, I envy you, you are an ignorant simpleton who is only limited by his imagination.  

^^ Has that been scientifically validated, or are you contradicting yourself by choosing to suggest such without scientific validation?

I wish I was dumber, life would have been a lot simpler.  Instead, I see a very complex world and I am sad that other people are dumb as rocks.  Where is the natural selection when you need her?


^^ If you continue on your course in life, you will probably become dumber. Perhaps you should have yourself checked out by several psychiatrists and psychologists. Particularly, show them you points in your post that I am quoting here, so that they understand what they are dealing with in you.

Besides, natural selection has not been scientifically validated. The closest it has come are the few jokers who suggest that it might have been scientifically validated.


Cool


You have to stand up to evil, otherwise, the evil will run amok.


The existence of evil and the moral obligation to oppose it also cannot be validated by science af_newbie. BADecker has done you a great service in deconstructing and highlighting the flaws in your logic. It is my recommendation that you spend some time pondering his comments.

It means a lot coming from a person who believes the evolution is a hoax.  He exposed his own lunacy, that is about it.

See you guys in the movies.

PS. All three of you, notbatman, BADecker and you should get together to iron out the details of your individual delusions. Clinically, you are all the same.  Failure to perceive reality.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
May 14, 2019, 08:38:52 AM

You clearly do not understand my position.  I do not have a choice.

My brain does not allow me to accept things that cannot be validated by science.  My epistemology is based on that.

^^ How does anyone know if all of the things that science has not validated can be scientifically validated? Do you have scientific validation that you do not have a choice without scientific validation?

The things that science cannot explain, I am ok with simply not knowing.

^^ If you don't have scientific validation for the idea that you only have choice with scientific validation, you don't really know if you only have scientifically validated choice. But you said that you only have scientifically validated choice, above.

You think I have made this choice but I am telling you I do not make choices to know what is true and what is not.

Things are true or false without me choosing them.


^^ Has it been scientifically validated that things are true or false without you choosing them? Quantum Entanglement suggests otherwise.

You have a choice, actually infinite number of them, you are limited only by your imagination, I, on the other hand, am confined to what science can discover and validate.

^^ Has science validated that you exist? If it hasn't, you may not be able to choose anything, scientifically validated or not... especially that someone else has some choices.

In a way, I envy you, you are an ignorant simpleton who is only limited by his imagination.  

^^ Has that been scientifically validated, or are you contradicting yourself by choosing to suggest such without scientific validation?

I wish I was dumber, life would have been a lot simpler.  Instead, I see a very complex world and I am sad that other people are dumb as rocks.  Where is the natural selection when you need her?


^^ If you continue on your course in life, you will probably become dumber. Perhaps you should have yourself checked out by several psychiatrists and psychologists. Particularly, show them you points in your post that I am quoting here, so that they understand what they are dealing with in you.

Besides, natural selection has not been scientifically validated. The closest it has come are the few jokers who suggest that it might have been scientifically validated.


Cool


You have to stand up to evil, otherwise, the evil will run amok.


The existence of evil and the moral obligation to oppose it also cannot be validated by science af_newbie. BADecker has done you a great service in deconstructing and highlighting the flaws in your logic. It is my recommendation that you spend some time pondering his comments.
legendary
Activity: 3990
Merit: 1385
May 14, 2019, 08:05:40 AM
^^^ Actually, the moral code written in the Koran and Hadiths has no place in the world now, or ever in the past. It was something perpetrated by Satan to destroy the work of the real God. The god of Islam is Satan.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
May 14, 2019, 07:56:24 AM
first of all we can not blame whole community just because of few rotten apples. And i think some of them hate religion because they think different religion are the reason of this extremism and radicalization presence in the world, which is true at all. Some people who are not following religion properly are extremist because no religion of world preach extremism.

What does the Bible or Quran say you should do with the gay people?

Religious people are the victims.  The worldview presented in the scriptures is what is wrong with religions.

Not 'few rotten apples' as you put it.  People are born into their religions and become indoctrinated as children.
What happens after that depends on who they associate with.

Religions poison your mind.  All religions are equally evil.

The issue is not with 'few rotten apples', the issue is with 'rotten scriptures'.

Religious apologetics always try to shift the blame on people, away from the scriptures, but the fact is that the scriptures are the root cause of all the problems created by religions.  Not the people who were indoctrinated into the religions of their parents.
its the laws to live, if we live without rules we are savages. Holy religious books do not stops you from any beneficial thing or action it only stops you from what is wrong and harmful for humanity.

Is killing gays wrong or not, in your opinion?


no i think its right.

Where are your morals?  You don't think murdering people is wrong?  

What the fuck is wrong with you?  Are you mentally sick?
than why you people can not hear to religious beliefs where is your freedom of speech. Why the hell you people are blaming religions for all the mess

Are you brain damaged?

Religious laws tell people to murder people for no apparent reason. That is not freedom of speech.  That is hate speech.

Religious laws incite violence.

And what about the diseases spreading from this homosexuality thing can you justify that as well. What about AIDS, many people die every year due to this disease and you think homosexuality is right and i consider it as a murder of innocent people from this gay community. You are savages living lives without any clear rules and instructions just living it. What about rape, alcohol, child abuse, murder, terrorism and other many bad deeds from which religions stops human beings.

Religion does not stop those things.  If anything, it encourages it and/or supports it.

BTW, you can get HIV on your next visit to the dentist.  HIV is spread through the exchange of bodily fluids, you ignoramus.

You are a barbarian.  Do you think you stand on the higher moral ground with your 6th-century wisdom?

You are ignoring centuries of scientific and technological progress we have made as a human race.

You are locked in a time capsule.  
yes you are right hiv spreads from fluid or serum but you are not pointing out the root cause from where it started. And what you are saying that religions does not stops but encourages it, how can you even say that when you don’t even know about religions. And what you are talking about science and 21 century so religions made laws to live many centuries  ago and science is following it. I feel pity for your thinking.


Do you want the root cause? Here it is:

https://www.theaidsinstitute.org/education/aids-101/where-did-hiv-come-0

I hope you will not teach your ignorance to your children.  Hopefully, you will no children to teach your 6th-century wisdom.

ehteist just want to eliminate religion from world which will never happen

Wrong again.  We want to expose the stupid, barbaric ideas religions profess.  

Religions will eliminate themselves.

Bad ideas will be replaced with better ideas.  That is how progress is made in pretty much anything.

On equal political footing, religions would not stand a chance against secular, scientific thought.


than you should search for the origin of science where started from and scientists who were involved were not secular nor etheist.


The ones that were, were burned at the stake, hung from a tree, crucified or had their heads chopped off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno

Here is a quote from Galileo for you to ponder on:

"The Bible shows the way to go to heaven, not the way the heavens go."

Newton believed in the "God of the Gaps", just like some scientists today.

Religion fills an emotional need.  It reassures believers that things will be ok, that some father figure is always there to help them.
This is self-delusion, but it does offer some psychological help to some people.  People like yourself.

If your religion stops you from killing people, you should strongly believe in your God and abide by the laws in the corresponding scriptures.
than what about Einstein and Thomas Edison what about many other scientists
You can not blame religions for every thing happening in this world. You think religion is impeding progress and I think it’s the inequality which is spreading hate.

Why do you care what famous scientists thought or said?  Are you looking for validation?  Are you believing in Spinoza's God?

For every scientist who believed (or believes) in God (in some shape, or form), I can find you 10 that don't.

If I were you, I would worry more about becoming an Islamist.  You want to kill gays, so you are half way there.

Your scripture can lead you into a slippery slope, 'kill gays' -> Islamist -> Jihadist -> Terrorist
its not about killing gay its about law which religions defined for human beings and for us we have to follow them. you dont follow religion if you dont want to but criticizing others is not justifiable.

I care about others that is why I am criticizing religions when religions are calling for a genocide of the whole group of people.

The moral code you have in the Quran was written for the 7th-century culture.  It has no place in the 21st century.

You have to stand up to evil, otherwise, the evil will run amok.

PS. Allah 'said' that wine is the work of the devil and one should not consume it, then he 'created' the heaven with rivers full of wine for you to enjoy.  Obviously, two different guys wrote the verses without knowing what the other wrote.

You believe in nonsense.  The nonsense that can lead you to kill people.  Just think about it for a second, if you can.  How in the world do you think you are going to establish the Sharia Law in the whole world?  By genocide that is how.

This ideology is as evil as they come.  Sickens me to even think about it.
 
Hitler's Mein Kampf is nothing compared to the Quran.
legendary
Activity: 3990
Merit: 1385
May 14, 2019, 07:22:19 AM

its not about killing gay its about law which religions defined for human beings and for us we have to follow them. you dont follow religion if you dont want to but criticizing others is not justifiable.

Oh, quit criticizing poor af_newbie.     Cool
jr. member
Activity: 121
Merit: 6
May 14, 2019, 07:16:59 AM
first of all we can not blame whole community just because of few rotten apples. And i think some of them hate religion because they think different religion are the reason of this extremism and radicalization presence in the world, which is true at all. Some people who are not following religion properly are extremist because no religion of world preach extremism.

What does the Bible or Quran say you should do with the gay people?

Religious people are the victims.  The worldview presented in the scriptures is what is wrong with religions.

Not 'few rotten apples' as you put it.  People are born into their religions and become indoctrinated as children.
What happens after that depends on who they associate with.

Religions poison your mind.  All religions are equally evil.

The issue is not with 'few rotten apples', the issue is with 'rotten scriptures'.

Religious apologetics always try to shift the blame on people, away from the scriptures, but the fact is that the scriptures are the root cause of all the problems created by religions.  Not the people who were indoctrinated into the religions of their parents.
its the laws to live, if we live without rules we are savages. Holy religious books do not stops you from any beneficial thing or action it only stops you from what is wrong and harmful for humanity.

Is killing gays wrong or not, in your opinion?


no i think its right.

Where are your morals?  You don't think murdering people is wrong?  

What the fuck is wrong with you?  Are you mentally sick?
than why you people can not hear to religious beliefs where is your freedom of speech. Why the hell you people are blaming religions for all the mess

Are you brain damaged?

Religious laws tell people to murder people for no apparent reason. That is not freedom of speech.  That is hate speech.

Religious laws incite violence.

And what about the diseases spreading from this homosexuality thing can you justify that as well. What about AIDS, many people die every year due to this disease and you think homosexuality is right and i consider it as a murder of innocent people from this gay community. You are savages living lives without any clear rules and instructions just living it. What about rape, alcohol, child abuse, murder, terrorism and other many bad deeds from which religions stops human beings.

Religion does not stop those things.  If anything, it encourages it and/or supports it.

BTW, you can get HIV on your next visit to the dentist.  HIV is spread through the exchange of bodily fluids, you ignoramus.

You are a barbarian.  Do you think you stand on the higher moral ground with your 6th-century wisdom?

You are ignoring centuries of scientific and technological progress we have made as a human race.

You are locked in a time capsule.  
yes you are right hiv spreads from fluid or serum but you are not pointing out the root cause from where it started. And what you are saying that religions does not stops but encourages it, how can you even say that when you don’t even know about religions. And what you are talking about science and 21 century so religions made laws to live many centuries  ago and science is following it. I feel pity for your thinking.


Do you want the root cause? Here it is:

https://www.theaidsinstitute.org/education/aids-101/where-did-hiv-come-0

I hope you will not teach your ignorance to your children.  Hopefully, you will no children to teach your 6th-century wisdom.

ehteist just want to eliminate religion from world which will never happen

Wrong again.  We want to expose the stupid, barbaric ideas religions profess.  

Religions will eliminate themselves.

Bad ideas will be replaced with better ideas.  That is how progress is made in pretty much anything.

On equal political footing, religions would not stand a chance against secular, scientific thought.


than you should search for the origin of science where started from and scientists who were involved were not secular nor etheist.


The ones that were, were burned at the stake, hung from a tree, crucified or had their heads chopped off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno

Here is a quote from Galileo for you to ponder on:

"The Bible shows the way to go to heaven, not the way the heavens go."

Newton believed in the "God of the Gaps", just like some scientists today.

Religion fills an emotional need.  It reassures believers that things will be ok, that some father figure is always there to help them.
This is self-delusion, but it does offer some psychological help to some people.  People like yourself.

If your religion stops you from killing people, you should strongly believe in your God and abide by the laws in the corresponding scriptures.
than what about Einstein and Thomas Edison what about many other scientists
You can not blame religions for every thing happening in this world. You think religion is impeding progress and I think it’s the inequality which is spreading hate.

Why do you care what famous scientists thought or said?  Are you looking for validation?  Are you believing in Spinoza's God?

For every scientist who believed (or believes) in God (in some shape, or form), I can find you 10 that don't.

If I were you, I would worry more about becoming an Islamist.  You want to kill gays, so you are half way there.

Your scripture can lead you into a slippery slope, 'kill gays' -> Islamist -> Jihadist -> Terrorist
its not about killing gay its about law which religions defined for human beings and for us we have to follow them. you dont follow religion if you dont want to but criticizing others is not justifiable.
legendary
Activity: 3990
Merit: 1385
May 14, 2019, 07:15:59 AM

You clearly do not understand my position.  I do not have a choice.

My brain does not allow me to accept things that cannot be validated by science.  My epistemology is based on that.

^^ How does anyone know if all of the things that science has not validated can be scientifically validated? Do you have scientific validation that you do not have a choice without scientific validation?

The things that science cannot explain, I am ok with simply not knowing.

^^ If you don't have scientific validation for the idea that you only have choice with scientific validation, you don't really know if you only have scientifically validated choice. But you said that you only have scientifically validated choice, above.

You think I have made this choice but I am telling you I do not make choices to know what is true and what is not.

Things are true or false without me choosing them.


^^ Has it been scientifically validated that things are true or false without you choosing them? Quantum Entanglement suggests otherwise.

You have a choice, actually infinite number of them, you are limited only by your imagination, I, on the other hand, am confined to what science can discover and validate.

^^ Has science validated that you exist? If it hasn't, you may not be able to choose anything, scientifically validated or not... especially that someone else has some choices.

In a way, I envy you, you are an ignorant simpleton who is only limited by his imagination.  

^^ Has that been scientifically validated, or are you contradicting yourself by choosing to suggest such without scientific validation?

I wish I was dumber, life would have been a lot simpler.  Instead, I see a very complex world and I am sad that other people are dumb as rocks.  Where is the natural selection when you need her?


^^ If you continue on your course in life, you will probably become dumber. Perhaps you should have yourself checked out by several psychiatrists and psychologists. Particularly, show them your points in your post that I am quoting here, so that they understand what they are dealing with in you.

Besides, natural selection has not been scientifically validated. The closest it has come are the few jokers who suggest that it might have been scientifically validated.


Cool
hero member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 645
May 13, 2019, 03:57:10 PM


Things are true or false without me choosing them.



I think that's something religious people cannot understand, the fact that you cannot choose to believe in god or anything for that matter, when you believe in something is because you are convinced of it for some reason but if you don't, you simply cannot force yourself to believe in it just like you can't force yourself to be gay if you are not.

...Human reasons can indeed only take you so far. Beyond that it is a matter of faith. Not everyone is capable of faith. ...


Where faith begins, human reason stops.

Some people are always in control of their reason, others let go of it and become religious.

Faith can be easily proven to be garbage. Take 100 different religious or believers in anything mystical/supernatural. They will all claim they have faith in their specific gods, etc and yet not all of them can be right, most of them claim their god is the one and only and yet some of them have to be wrong even if one god is real but they all have faith, clearly faith is not a good path to the truth.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
May 13, 2019, 02:30:53 PM


Things are true or false without me choosing them.



I think that's something religious people cannot understand, the fact that you cannot choose to believe in god or anything for that matter, when you believe in something is because you are convinced of it for some reason but if you don't, you simply cannot force yourself to believe in it just like you can't force yourself to be gay if you are not.

...Human reasons can indeed only take you so far. Beyond that it is a matter of faith. Not everyone is capable of faith. ...


Where faith begins, human reason stops.

Some people are always in control of their reason, others let go of it and become religious.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
May 13, 2019, 01:26:11 PM


Things are true or false without me choosing them.



I think that's something religious people cannot understand, the fact that you cannot choose to believe in god or anything for that matter, when you believe in something is because you are convinced of it for some reason but if you don't, you simply cannot force yourself to believe in it just like you can't force yourself to be gay if you are not.

I think many religious people understand. Human reasons can indeed only take you so far. Beyond that it is a matter of faith. Not everyone is capable of faith. I will close with this essay from John C. Wright. He is one of my favorite authors and wrote on this topic.

The More Rational Model
http://www.scifiwright.com/2017/05/the-more-rational-model/#more-18419
Quote from: John C. Wright
A comment on my publisher’s website asks:

Quote
“Do you have any suggestions for finding faith? I see the necessity of religion, and Christianity in particular, but aside from history and cultural affinity I don’t have actual belief.”


My suggestion: Pray.

Also, consider that the Christian worldview is more coherent, robust, and rational than any secular worldview.
Our model explains things such as why stars look fair and beautiful to our eyes when it serves no credible Darwinian purpose to do so.

Our model explains the naturalistic fallacy, that is, the gap between ‘is’ and ‘ought’ which secular philosophy cannot explain, and some cannot even address.

Our model explains how free will can exist inside a deterministic universe. A materialist cannot even formulate the question in a rational way.

Our model explains why humans seek beauty. Social-evolutionary explanations for this are less convincing than astrology.

Our model explains how creatures with free will capable of grasping intellectual abstractions can arise in a universe which contains no such thing as intellectual abstractions.

Our model allows investigation of final causes in nature, without which nature cannot properly be understood.

Our model explains the prevalence of so many theists throughout history. The theory that over nine tenths of mankind, including some of the most brilliant thinkers in their age, were raving lunatics who hallucinate about imaginary sky beings is not credible and not supported by evidence.

Our model explains the various miracles and supernatural wonders that are in the older history books, and which, for no scientific reason, were excised from being reported.

Our model explains both why there is a plurality of religions and why there are striking similarities between them.

Our model explains the origin of the universe. By definition, if the universe were all that existed, exists and ever will exist, than a material cause for it is impossible.

Our model explains the current hegemony of the West and makes clear the meaning and purpose of what otherwise seems like insane and suicidal attempts by the apparently sober and sane men on Left to undermine and destroy it.

Our model explains why you should not let your daughter whore around. She is immortal, and will outlast any nation, and language, any institution and human work on Earth.

Our model explains why you should not, once you have truly and deeply contemplated the vastness of the universe and the oppressive span of time to follow the death of everything you know, fall into despair, and end your meaningless life.

Our model gives something to live for nobler than one’s own pleasure seeking.

Our model avoids the logical paradox of asserting man can create meaning in life out of a vacuum. That would require an ability to create meaning out of meaninglessness, which is absurd.

Our model explains why men and women are different, and how we must arrange the dangerous mystery of the mating dance between the sexes to improve our chances to achieve joy rather than misery.

Our model gives rational hope of seeking the departed dead again.

Our model explains human psychology better than perverted old Freud dressing up old Greek myths in make believe, and far better than cranky old Thomas Hobbes and his cynicism.

Our model makes sense. Others are either incorrect, incomplete, or paradoxical, or lead ultimately to wrath or despair. Our model is the sole one which sees life as not futile and death as not bitter.

And, on an intellectual level, our model is the one to which to turn once your mind has become wearied with the reductionist, absurdist and postmodern models, which are in fact no models at all, but rather, are excuses why one should not make a model of the universe, nor seek any answers to deep questions.

It is the model to which to turn once you are heartily sick of hearing “It Just Happened” as the explanation for the origin of man, the universe, and all things.

Naturally, I do not expect any reader to take any of these conclusions as if they were persuasive arguments. Each would require a separate and in depth conversation. This is just a list, and a partial list at that, of the intellectually satisfying fullness of Christian thought. It is the scent and savor of the feast of Christian philosophy, not the meat and potatoes.

This list is not meant to argue the point. It is meant to whet the appetite of intellects starved and desiccated after vain attempt to feast on the shadows, dust and ashes of modern thought, and show the contrast.

There are additional reasons beyond this. All human reason can do is clear away false objections to faith. Faith itself is a supernatural gift bestowed by God to protect his own from the sudden, irrational loss of confidence in the self evident to which our foolish race is prone.
hero member
Activity: 1624
Merit: 645
May 13, 2019, 12:15:56 PM

Materialism is an assumption. It is a chosen framework to understand the universe.

I hold it to be a very flawed very problematic framework with multiple consequences....
....
...
Our reality is material, whether you like it or not.  If it was not, I would not be a materialist.
...

Ok af_newbie you have clearly made your choice.

I have done my best to clarify our differences reduce them to their most basic divergence in thought. I appear to have failed in shifting your position in the slightest. It is time now for me to disengage as I have nothing further to add. I wish you well.

The Big Decision about Life...
http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2017/10/the-big-decision-about-life.html?m=1
Quote from: Bruce Charlton
...Is a metaphysical one - not a matter of 'evidence'. And that insight (metaphysics not evidence) is the first step.

The situation is that Life is a mixed-picture: the decision is whether Life is validated by its best moments or times; or destroyed by its worst.

As I said, evidence does not help - the question is not quantitative. This is a matter of primary assumption.

And the question is not answerable in isolation - Life can only be validated if Life has 'meaning'; and the nature of validation depends on the nature of that meaning.

On the other hand, if you have already accepted that life has no meaning - is merely determined, or random - then you have already made your Big Decision. (Whether implicitly or explicitly) your basic assumptions ensure that for you Life is defined by its worst aspects - indeed the single, most extreme worst-of-Life is the truth-of-Life (both for individuals, and en masse).

Nothing can be done for you - because any possible Good will be negated by One Bad Thing - even when that Bad is merely the evanescence of Good.

On the other hand; if you understand, and live-by, the conviction that the best of Life is the truth of life (despite that this cannot be continuous) - then you have indomitable strength, assurance, and hope.


You clearly do not understand my position.  I do not have a choice.

My brain does not allow me to accept things that cannot be validated by science.  My epistemology is based on that.

The things that science cannot explain, I am ok with simply not knowing.

You think I have made this choice but I am telling you I do not make choices to know what is true and what is not.

Things are true or false without me choosing them.


You have a choice, actually infinite number of them, you are limited only by your imagination, I, on the other hand, am confined to what science can discover and validate.

In a way, I envy you, you are an ignorant simpleton who is only limited by his imagination. 

I wish I was dumber, life would have been a lot simpler.  Instead, I see a very complex world and I am sad that other people are dumb as rocks.  Where is the natural selection when you need her?


I think that's something religious people cannot understand, the fact that you cannot choose to believe in god or anything for that matter, when you believe in something is because you are convinced of it for some reason but if you don't, you simply cannot force yourself to believe in it just like you can't force yourself to be gay if you are not.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
May 13, 2019, 11:34:50 AM

Materialism is an assumption. It is a chosen framework to understand the universe.

I hold it to be a very flawed very problematic framework with multiple consequences....
....
...
Our reality is material, whether you like it or not.  If it was not, I would not be a materialist.
...

Ok af_newbie you have clearly made your choice.

I have done my best to clarify our differences reduce them to their most basic divergence in thought. I appear to have failed in shifting your position in the slightest. It is time now for me to disengage as I have nothing further to add. I wish you well.

The Big Decision about Life...
http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2017/10/the-big-decision-about-life.html?m=1
Quote from: Bruce Charlton
...Is a metaphysical one - not a matter of 'evidence'. And that insight (metaphysics not evidence) is the first step.

The situation is that Life is a mixed-picture: the decision is whether Life is validated by its best moments or times; or destroyed by its worst.

As I said, evidence does not help - the question is not quantitative. This is a matter of primary assumption.

And the question is not answerable in isolation - Life can only be validated if Life has 'meaning'; and the nature of validation depends on the nature of that meaning.

On the other hand, if you have already accepted that life has no meaning - is merely determined, or random - then you have already made your Big Decision. (Whether implicitly or explicitly) your basic assumptions ensure that for you Life is defined by its worst aspects - indeed the single, most extreme worst-of-Life is the truth-of-Life (both for individuals, and en masse).

Nothing can be done for you - because any possible Good will be negated by One Bad Thing - even when that Bad is merely the evanescence of Good.

On the other hand; if you understand, and live-by, the conviction that the best of Life is the truth of life (despite that this cannot be continuous) - then you have indomitable strength, assurance, and hope.


You clearly do not understand my position.  I do not have a choice.

My brain does not allow me to accept things that cannot be validated by science.  My epistemology is based on that.

The things that science cannot explain, I am ok with simply not knowing.

You think I have made this choice but I am telling you I do not make choices to know what is true and what is not.

Things are true or false without me choosing them.


You have a choice, actually infinite number of them, you are limited only by your imagination, I, on the other hand, am confined to what science can discover and validate.

In a way, I envy you, you are an ignorant simpleton who is only limited by his imagination. 

I wish I was dumber, life would have been a lot simpler.  Instead, I see a very complex world and I am sad that other people are dumb as rocks.  Where is the natural selection when you need her?
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
May 13, 2019, 09:05:45 AM

Materialism is an assumption. It is a chosen framework to understand the universe.

I hold it to be a very flawed very problematic framework with multiple consequences....
....
...
Our reality is material, whether you like it or not.  If it was not, I would not be a materialist.
...

Ok af_newbie you have clearly made your choice.

I have done my best to clarify our differences reduce them to their most basic divergence in thought. I appear to have failed in shifting your position in the slightest. It is time now for me to disengage as I have nothing further to add. I wish you well.

The Big Decision about Life...
http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2017/10/the-big-decision-about-life.html?m=1
Quote from: Bruce Charlton
...Is a metaphysical one - not a matter of 'evidence'. And that insight (metaphysics not evidence) is the first step.

The situation is that Life is a mixed-picture: the decision is whether Life is validated by its best moments or times; or destroyed by its worst.

As I said, evidence does not help - the question is not quantitative. This is a matter of primary assumption.

And the question is not answerable in isolation - Life can only be validated if Life has 'meaning'; and the nature of validation depends on the nature of that meaning.

On the other hand, if you have already accepted that life has no meaning - is merely determined, or random - then you have already made your Big Decision. (Whether implicitly or explicitly) your basic assumptions ensure that for you Life is defined by its worst aspects - indeed the single, most extreme worst-of-Life is the truth-of-Life (both for individuals, and en masse).

Nothing can be done for you - because any possible Good will be negated by One Bad Thing - even when that Bad is merely the evanescence of Good.

On the other hand; if you understand, and live-by, the conviction that the best of Life is the truth of life (despite that this cannot be continuous) - then you have indomitable strength, assurance, and hope.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
May 13, 2019, 06:31:59 AM
What Lies Behind the Moral Law
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcRFYGr1zcg

Not really a choice.  There is no evidence to support anything but materialism.

I cannot believe in fairy tales just because someone wrote them.

I use this thing called brain to figure out what is real and what is not.

Materialism is real.  Non-materialism is not.

Materialism is an assumption. It is a chosen framework to understand the universe.

I hold it to be a very flawed very problematic framework with multiple consequences including a belief in subjective morality, but that is my choice the start of a very different path than the one you took. It's the fork in the road where our paths diverge. The rest of our differences can be traced back to that divergence.

This is really not a question of science or evidence at all but of primary assumption. The video demonstrates that well. CS Lewis had a genuine gift.

You do indeed have your brain and logic to figure things out. You also have your heart and your conscious. You need to use them both when faced with a choice that must be made independent of and before evidence.

I think you are the one who made many unsupported assumptions.  Materialism does not require you to make any assumptions.  You use the scientific method to derive all your knowledge.

What is the flaw of materialism? That it does not explain everything in the universe?  Well, that is its beauty, not a flaw.  One day we'll have all the answers.

The difference between us is that you cannot accept the "I don't know the answer" and you pile up your own imagined (unsupported by any evidence) theology on top of materialism.  Your belief system is unsupported by science.  Unsupported by the reality around us.

Our reality is material, whether you like it or not.  If it was not, I would not be a materialist.

PS. Your non-materialism is basically all the stuff you don't know.   You piled up all that into your 'religious belief system' to give you a psychological comfort. That is all.  If it helps you, go for it, despite the fact it is all bullshit on wheels.
legendary
Activity: 3990
Merit: 1385
May 13, 2019, 04:23:58 AM
^^^ After a while you just have to accept what this material indicates... that there isn't really anything but material there.

How does anyone answer something that is simply material? A chunk of material can't ask a question. It can't postulate answers. The formulation that comes about through them is not the response put forth after thought. It just looks like it is.

Probably the closest one can come to communicating with this material, is to get ideas from it, and ask ones self questions based on these chunks of materialism, and then answer one's own questions.

Cool

EDIT: Now that I think about it, that's a really good point!

Some material in nature seems to produce thinking points, ask questions and give answers. But since it is only material, there isn't any obvious intelligence within it.

What I mean is, you can go to nature, look at all the ways it operates, and see fantastic machinery throughout. You can tell that God exists and is intelligent beyond beyond, simply because we can use nature's machinery to make our own simple machinery. Machines have makers, right?

So, when some material without a soul poses some questions, or makes some points that look like thinking has been done, and that there is intelligence there, yet this same material claims that it doesn't have a soul and spirit, it must be another complexity of nature, made by God, right?

No use answering. Nobody can answer God. However, if it is God simply providing an exercise in thought for us - by making this material appear to act like it has a soul and spirit - we should really ponder the ideas that God sets before us, with not only our minds, but our souls and spirits, as well. I mean, God is giving us information in all kinds of miraculous ways.

I mean, who ever heard of an O.T. talking donkey, or a worldwide flood, or a N.T. turning of water into wine, or raising the dead, or all kinds of other miracles? But they happened, right? So why should we think that God couldn't make some material without a soul and spirit look and act like it has soul and spirit. What a miracle from God!

Right?

Cool

FURTHER EDIT: WOW! Think of what is really going on here. God is making some artificial intelligence that is only material, to actually think. And some of the AI is going out and making its own brand of AI because it is able to think so well.

CS Lewis was way more accurate than even he knew.

Cool
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
May 12, 2019, 11:01:38 PM
What Lies Behind the Moral Law
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcRFYGr1zcg

Not really a choice.  There is no evidence to support anything but materialism.

I cannot believe in fairy tales just because someone wrote them.

I use this thing called brain to figure out what is real and what is not.

Materialism is real.  Non-materialism is not.

Materialism is an assumption. It is a chosen framework to understand the universe.

I hold it to be a very flawed very problematic framework with multiple consequences including a belief in subjective morality, but that is my choice the start of a very different path than the one you took. It's the fork in the road where our paths diverge. The rest of our differences can be traced back to that divergence.

This is really not a question of science or evidence at all but of primary assumption. The video demonstrates that well. CS Lewis had a genuine gift.

You do indeed have your brain and logic to figure things out. You also have your heart and your conscious. You need to use them both when faced with a choice that must be made independent of and before evidence.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
May 12, 2019, 10:51:01 PM

I have not chosen it.  You have not provided any evidence of the objective moral code.  

I have just pointed it out that the moral code that you think is objective is actually very subjective as evidenced by the silly Bronze Age, Bible rules.

You have decided that the Christian moral code is objective.  That very decision was subjective.

Yes you have. You made the choice consciously or unconsciously when you embraced materialism. This little video should help clarify this for you.

What Lies Behind the Moral Law
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcRFYGr1zcg

Not really a choice.  There is no evidence to support anything but materialism.

I cannot believe in fairy tales just because someone wrote them.

I use this thing called brain to figure out what is real and what is not.

Materialism is real.  Non-materialism is not.
legendary
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
May 12, 2019, 10:38:18 PM

I have not chosen it.  You have not provided any evidence of the objective moral code.  

I have just pointed it out that the moral code that you think is objective is actually very subjective as evidenced by the silly Bronze Age, Bible rules.

You have decided that the Christian moral code is objective.  That very decision was subjective.

Yes you have. You made the choice consciously or unconsciously when you embraced materialism. This little video should help clarify this for you.

What Lies Behind the Moral Law
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcRFYGr1zcg
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 1468
May 12, 2019, 09:38:34 PM

The problem you have is that you subjectively chose the 'right' God (for you).   That is why your resulting moral code can never be objective.  It will be the moral code of the people who started your religion.

Have you noticed that most people are very lucky to be born into the 'right' religion, LOL.

Why did you reject the Quran as the source of the 'objective morality'?  Why did you reject all other religions and over 3000+ other Gods?

You see, we are not that different.  I just rejected one more God than you.

I would make the case that I have actually rejected one more god then you for at some point in my life I have rejected every deity you have but I have also rejected your idol of moral relativism.

I was not at all religious for the majority of my adult life. I have embraced the secular world and and succeeded in it on its own terms. I am a financially successful prodigal son if you will. It was only comparatively recently that I came to understand the bankruptcy of the entire modern system its financial system yes, hence my interest in bitcoin, but the failure goes much deeper than just finance.

When I did return to God it was a slow process starting with logical first principles to determine that my beliefs where in accordance with my reason and that my views were not self contradictory or incoherent.

Only then did I try and figure out what if any religion I fit into best. I did look at alternatives. Most religions have wisdom in them if you look. That includes Islam and Buddhism among others. The goal is to find truth. As for myself I seriously considered converting to orthodox Judaism for a long time and I even took a few classes with a rabbi. The Ramchal's book Way of God is to date one of the most insightful I have ever read and I would recommend it to anyone interested in God be they Christian, Muslim, Jewish, or Atheist.

In the end, however, I returned to my long forgotten roots in Christianity. I am still not affiliated with any particular church within that broad domain but I suspect I will probably eventually join my local Seventh-Day Adventist church as they are a good group of people and I am comfortable with their church doctrines. That part of the journey is not yet complete. As for why I ultimately chose Christianity over the other variants possible that is a bit complex for now lets just say I felt it provided the best role model and blueprint for thought and action.

You feel my beliefs are the subjective code of the people who started my religion. We will just have to disagree on that. You have chosen not to believe in objective truth at all so you really can not imagine it any other way and I understand that.

I have long ago given up any expectation that I will shift you from your beliefs and I suspect that you have the same feelings about me. The value of our exchange therefore lies in it's usefulness to others. We represent two different paths that lead to dramatically different choices and life philosophies. Others at that fork may find our divergence useful and thought provoking. I agree that we are not that different. There but for the grace of God, go I.

I have not chosen it.  You have not provided any evidence of the objective moral code

I have just pointed it out that the moral code that you think is objective is actually very subjective as evidenced by the silly Bronze Age, Bible rules.

You have decided that the Christian moral code is objective.  That very decision was subjective.
Pages:
Jump to: