Murder is defined as intentional UNLAWFUL killing of people. War isn't necessarily unlawful.
Advertisement
by Methodological Individualism » Sun Dec 10, 2017 11:36 am
The Portland Territory wrote:Here's a question that I've debated with many others before, but will bring here.
What is the point of morals if there is no higher power to enforce them? I say this because, if you are an atheist, agnostic, whatever, if you have any at all, your morals are subjective.
by Collatis » Sun Dec 10, 2017 11:57 am
The Portland Territory wrote:Here's a question that I've debated with many others before, but will bring here.
What is the point of morals if there is no higher power to enforce them? I say this because, if you are an atheist, agnostic, whatever, if you have any at all, your morals are subjective. Morals are not objective because there has never been anything eternal and powerful to support certain ideals. If morals are subjective and are so susceptible to change, then why have any at all?
PRO: social democracy, internationalism, progressivism, democracy,
republicanism, human rights, democratic socialism, Keynesianism,
EU, NATO, two-state solution, Democratic Party, Bernie Sanders
CON: conservatism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, neoliberalism,
death penalty, Marxism-Leninism, laissez faire, reaction, fascism,
antisemitism, isolationism, Republican Party, Donald Trump
Voting Through The Ages | Voter Guide | The Presidents | Voting Without Borders
by USS Monitor » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:03 pm
Minoa wrote:USS Monitor wrote:Why do we need a thread for this? I'm mostly asking as a personal question rather than as a mod because I am atheist and I don't see the point of it.
My personal view is what is the purpose of believing in religion, when so many bad things happen in the world today?
If religion worked, all the bad things should have been resolved by now.
Also, no Christmas for me: there is no purpose of the holiday for me, when there is nothing to hope for as a disabled person trapped in a country hostile to disabled people as a result of the austerity measures, even if the holiday itself was not as heavily commercialised as now.*
*Extra: also add on the likelihood that our generation faces a life of debt, low-paid jobs and little to no hope of ever owning a home (due to the monstrous starting prices), despite many of them putting a valiant effort to avoid it.
by Methodological Individualism » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:04 pm
Collatis wrote:If morals are decided by a deity, then they are, by definition, subject to potentially constant change. Your deity can change what is right or wrong based on a passing whim. If your morals come only from what a deity decides they are, why have then at all? There doesn't seem to be anything inherently wrong about murder if God could make it morally right tomorrow.
by USS Monitor » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:06 pm
by Genivaria » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:13 pm
Kenmoria wrote:Ashlak wrote:I made this thread to talk about things like atheism/agnosticism, criticism of religion, skepticism, separation of church and state issues, living as a non religious person in a religious culture or family, and things of that nature.
As an atheist, Is ompletely support this thread idea. However, it needs much more of an opening post to avoid being locked. For example, a conversation starter like "Do you think evolution should be the only method of creation taught in schools?".
by Methodological Individualism » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:13 pm
USS Monitor wrote:One reason I like Taoism, even though I don't believe that Tao literally exists, is because it's good for learning how to cope when the world doesn't go the way you want. In Taoism, keeping your cool and finding peace is more important than fighting for justice.
.
by The Alma Mater » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:14 pm
by Community Values » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:15 pm
by Collatis » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:19 pm
USS Monitor wrote:One reason I like Taoism, even though I don't believe that Tao literally exists, is because it's good for learning how to cope when the world doesn't go the way you want. In Taoism, keeping your cool and finding peace is more important than fighting for justice.
PRO: social democracy, internationalism, progressivism, democracy,
republicanism, human rights, democratic socialism, Keynesianism,
EU, NATO, two-state solution, Democratic Party, Bernie Sanders
CON: conservatism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, neoliberalism,
death penalty, Marxism-Leninism, laissez faire, reaction, fascism,
antisemitism, isolationism, Republican Party, Donald Trump
Voting Through The Ages | Voter Guide | The Presidents | Voting Without Borders
by USS Monitor » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:21 pm
Dejanic wrote:USS Monitor wrote:Why do we need a thread for this? I'm mostly asking as a personal question rather than as a mod because I am atheist and I don't see the point of it.
It's kind of weird how some don't believe in religion and are quite anti-theistic, but make a personal identity and belief system (almost like a religion?) out of their non belief.
by Jormengand » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:24 pm
The Alma Mater wrote:It really is to some.
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.
by Methodological Individualism » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:27 pm
USS Monitor wrote:Dejanic wrote:It's kind of weird how some don't believe in religion and are quite anti-theistic, but make a personal identity and belief system (almost like a religion?) out of their non belief.
And some of them get into this thing where they think being atheist means you have to worship science and logic and meticulously avoid anything sentimental or touchy-feely. Even though I don't believe in God or practice a religion, I don't feel like I have anything in common with people like that.
by Collatis » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:27 pm
PRO: social democracy, internationalism, progressivism, democracy,
republicanism, human rights, democratic socialism, Keynesianism,
EU, NATO, two-state solution, Democratic Party, Bernie Sanders
CON: conservatism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, neoliberalism,
death penalty, Marxism-Leninism, laissez faire, reaction, fascism,
antisemitism, isolationism, Republican Party, Donald Trump
Voting Through The Ages | Voter Guide | The Presidents | Voting Without Borders
by Methodological Individualism » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:30 pm
Collatis wrote:What is everyone's view of New Atheism and antitheism?
by USS Monitor » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:35 pm
The Portland Territory wrote:Here's a question that I've debated with many others before, but will bring here.
What is the point of morals if there is no higher power to enforce them? I say this because, if you are an atheist, agnostic, whatever, if you have any at all, your morals are subjective. Morals are not objective because there has never been anything eternal and powerful to support certain ideals. If morals are subjective and are so susceptible to change, then why have any at all? For example, in 2004, Barack Obama said that he does not support same-sex marriage. Ten years later, with his support, same-sex marriage becomes legal in the United States. Why should beliefs that are so fundamental in your life, change? Morals, in the secular sense, are meant to make you a good person. If you keep changing them, because they are subjective, then what keeps somebody from forming their own dangerous beliefs which are "moral" to them?
by USS Monitor » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:41 pm
Methodological Individualism wrote:USS Monitor wrote:One reason I like Taoism, even though I don't believe that Tao literally exists, is because it's good for learning how to cope when the world doesn't go the way you want. In Taoism, keeping your cool and finding peace is more important than fighting for justice.
.
It's been a while since I last read a translation of Laozi, but the impression I got was less pacifistic, and more activist with efficiency. The point of being like the water is not to be limpid and passive, but rather because the water's natural relaxation allows it to move mountains and carve valleys with no intentional effort.
The other illustration I've heard was Bruce Lee, who by incessant training and activity mastered his skill so completely that he could fight aand win against an adversary with almost no effort.
So the point is not not fighting, so much as its knowing how to fight without effort.
Or "Tao." Which exists because it doesn't
**one hand clapping**
by Jormengand » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:42 pm
Collatis wrote:What is everyone's view of New Atheism and antitheism?
Jormengand wrote:It would be really meta if I sigged this.
by Methodological Individualism » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:43 pm
USS Monitor wrote:2nd part of the post that you cut out would be relevant here.
by Genivaria » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:47 pm
The Portland Territory wrote:Here's a question that I've debated with many others before, but will bring here.
What is the point of morals if there is no higher power to enforce them? I say this because, if you are an atheist, agnostic, whatever, if you have any at all, your morals are subjective. Morals are not objective because there has never been anything eternal and powerful to support certain ideals. If morals are subjective and are so susceptible to change, then why have any at all? For example, in 2004, Barack Obama said that he does not support same-sex marriage. Ten years later, with his support, same-sex marriage becomes legal in the United States. Why should beliefs that are so fundamental in your life, change? Morals, in the secular sense, are meant to make you a good person. If you keep changing them, because they are subjective, then what keeps somebody from forming their own dangerous beliefs which are "moral" to them?
by Hakons » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:47 pm
Collatis wrote:The Portland Territory wrote:Here's a question that I've debated with many others before, but will bring here.
What is the point of morals if there is no higher power to enforce them? I say this because, if you are an atheist, agnostic, whatever, if you have any at all, your morals are subjective. Morals are not objective because there has never been anything eternal and powerful to support certain ideals. If morals are subjective and are so susceptible to change, then why have any at all?
If morals are decided by a deity, then they are, by definition, subject to potentially constant change. Your deity can change what is right or wrong based on a passing whim. If your morals come only from what a deity decides they are, why have then at all? There doesn't seem to be anything inherently wrong about murder if God could make it morally right tomorrow.
On the other hand, morality derived from reason and logical thought does not change. Humanity's interpretations of logic can change, of course, but logic does not change from day to day. Treating gays like second class citizens was wrong in 2004, it was wrong in 1969, it was wrong in 4 BCE, and it is still wrong today. The view of the majority may have changed, but the logical backbone of equal marriage has not.
by Hakons » Sun Dec 10, 2017 12:50 pm
Methodological Individualism wrote:Collatis wrote:If morals are decided by a deity, then they are, by definition, subject to potentially constant change. Your deity can change what is right or wrong based on a passing whim. If your morals come only from what a deity decides they are, why have then at all? There doesn't seem to be anything inherently wrong about murder if God could make it morally right tomorrow.
Indeed, the only thing "objective" about devine command is the fact of it's vapid and pointless underlying nihlism.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, Dimetrodon Empire, Europa Undivided, Haganham, HISPIDA, Homalia, Kenmoria, Kerwa, Neo-Hermitius, Omphalos, Picairn, Statesburg, The Yeetusa, Tiami, Tungstan
Advertisement