I'm saying that atheist morality is flawed in nature, and is wrong.

Atheists do a lot right in casting off religion, only to toss the CORE SHACKLE of religion back on their ankle? What the sweet Christ.

However, it is probably better than theist morality, because it's grounded in more realistic concepts. (and is probably more light-weight, so they're doing better for themselves. depends on the atheist though, it's hard to make a statement about "atheist morality").

Quote :

"or that it is wrong, but at the same time its a superior belief system?"

Yeah, this is what I meant

[Edited on April 2, 2006 at 4:59 PM. Reason : .]

4/2/2006 4:58:30 PM

im not going to get into this but I will point out something I found interesting at the God vs No God debate a week or so ago.

When the theist was naming off all the people who killed large numbers of people who were atheist he went through a list that had Stalin, Pol Pot and ....Hilter

i found this seriously flawed and Jesseph didnt call him out.

4/2/2006 5:10:23 PM

Theist vs atheist arguments are usually huge cripple-fights anyway.

Are you really surprised he was allowed to toss such a flawed argument out there unchallenged?

4/2/2006 5:12:56 PM

well being in Jessephs class i figured he would have said something like ........... uh Hilter was a christian.

whatev

4/2/2006 5:16:31 PM

^^ cripple-fight?

4/2/2006 5:23:48 PM

When doing philosophy in limited scope of time it can be difficult to get your point across explaining why you are right if you have to go off on tangents explaining why the other person is wrong. I didn't go to Jessephs most recent atheist vs theist debate, but I imagine he had a basic argument structure that he wanted ppl to hear without muddling the issue with too much calling out of the other guy.

4/2/2006 5:31:05 PM

Atheist Morality superior to Christian Morality: An Oxymoron

4/2/2006 8:19:02 PM

Augustine and Aquinas and many other Christian philosophers equate the word God with Goodness or Justice and other nice descriptors that they basically use for other names for God. Even if you don’t buy the atheists could find morality in a world devoid of a God, if they are seeking goodness in a world with a God (a premise I believe any theist would accept) then they are striving for God but just calling him by a different name. Presumably striving for morality, in the world where the theist is right, is a religious striving whether the person doing the striving knows it or not. If they come to some principles of goodness, fairness, and justice then I think it would be difficult for you to call “atheist morality” an oxymoron. I mean sure, they still may go to hell for not doing other required religious endeavors like getting saved, being baptized, participating in the holy eucharist etc, but at worst any atheist trying to find morality is just moving towards god without calling him by name. Hating on atheists for trying to move toward the Good just b/c they don’t call it by the same name you do seems counterintuitive b/c it’s a step in the right direction even if its not all the way there.

4/2/2006 8:43:27 PM

^^ Because a value system doesn't qualify as a moral code!

Quote :

"cripple-fight?"

4/2/2006 8:45:37 PM

supplanter, although i agree with the point you are trying to make, the classic christian argument against that is that if they reject god then they are unable to find truth or good. although i disagree with that view it is logically consistent.

4/2/2006 9:30:01 PM

But I think when presented in this way, that an Atheists attempts to find goodness and morality are steps towards God, just not enough steps, that theists would be able to recognize it as a good thing rather than being hostile in a way that would drive an atheist not to make any steps whatsoever.

4/2/2006 10:44:23 PM

Quote :

"Atheist Morality superior to Christian Morality: An Oxymoron"

The words of a man whose only concept of morality is what is commanded by some supposed authority.

4/3/2006 1:54:45 PM

Atheist morality and Christian morality are no different in my opinion since they are built upon human beings. Most of the communist regimes of the 20th century were established in part as scientific atheist states (unshackling the masses from the opiate known as religion or whatnot), and from what I gather, their morality was no way superior or worse to Christian societies (or societies built upon any other religion whether Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, etc. for that matter).

4/3/2006 2:09:28 PM

The most heinous and the most cruel crimes of which history has record have been committed under the cover of religion or equally noble motives.
-Mohandas Gandhi

Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.
-Blaise Pascal

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.
-Thomas Paine

During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the Clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.
-James Madison

4/3/2006 2:33:39 PM

Brian, go smoke something. The last two quotes had to do with church and state, and the first two were written before perfectly atheistic communists managed to kill everyone they could get their hands on. Actually, that's not true. Ghandi should have known better. He also wasn't an atheist.

4/3/2006 3:46:24 PM

Quote :

"go smoke something"

Good idea. Wanna join?

....maybe you'll like these better:

Man is a Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion - several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself and cuts his throat if his theology isn't straight.
-Mark Twain

It is always better to have no ideas than false ones; to believe nothing, than to believe what is wrong.
-Thomas Jefferson

Where knowledge ends, religion begins.
-Benjamin Disraeli

The foundation of morality is to...give up pretending to believe that for which there is no evidence, and repeating unintelligible propositions about things beyond the possibilities of knowledge.
-T.H. Huxley

4/3/2006 4:07:47 PM

Dont embarass yourself

4/4/2006 2:06:54 AM

For ages, a deadly conflict has been waged between a few brave men and women of thought and genius upon the one side, and the great ignorant religious mass on the other. This is the war between Science and Faith. The few have appealed to reason, to honor, to law, to freedom, to the known, and to happiness here in this world. The many have appealed to prejudice, to fear, to miracle, to slavery, to the unknown, and to misery hereafter. The few have said "Think" The many have said "Believe!"
-Robert Ingersoll

4/4/2006 2:47:43 AM

OK, I know you are probably gone to say some shit about my screen name, but that has nothing to do with what I'm going to say ... and I have no idea what venue you plan to use to publish this thing, so I'm assuming it's a paper.

1. Stick with a gender-neutral tone. In my experience referring to something in the feminine makes some men think it magically doesn't apply to them, and it pisses off the women.

2. If you're trying to make an argument about morality, you're better off approaching it WITHOUT attacking religion ... and especially without attacking specific religions, Christianity or otherwise. People have more respect for logical arguments if they aren't put on the defensive right away.

3. The general structure is lacking ... I don't really know where to begin, but it's more like reading one side of a conversation than a serious paper. If you're going to stick with the religion thing, it's best to assume your readers understand what the religion is about otherwise you really will come off sounding like a dick. If you insist on explaining, use footnotes or endnotes, or just write an appendix. Historical evidence is good too.

4. Avoid argumentative language in the title ... consider using something more neutral, like "as compared to" so that your target audience actually pauses long enough to read.

5. "Less" "punctuation" "especially" "when" "you" "aren't" "listing" "your" "source"

4/4/2006 11:45:21 PM

Quote :

"OK, I know you are probably gone to say some shit about my screen name, but that has nothing to do with what I'm going to say ... and I have no idea what venue you plan to use to publish this thing, so I'm assuming it's a paper."

no i dont care about your screen name (should i?) ... i'm not planning on publishing it anywhere. ... no its not a paper, its just something i whipped up in about half an hour at 2am, mainly as a counter to a lot of stupid shit i was reading in a related thread "atheists most mistrusted minority"

Quote :

"1. Stick with a gender-neutral tone. In my experience referring to something in the feminine makes some men think it magically doesn't apply to them, and it pisses off the women"

disagree. mixed gender is currently fashionable in a variety of non-fiction genres. i constantly read engineering journals where the 3rd person subject is "she"... and gender neutral often comes off sounding contrived. at any rate its a style point.

Quote :

"2. If you're trying to make an argument about morality, you're better off approaching it WITHOUT attacking religion ... and especially without attacking specific religions, Christianity or otherwise. People have more respect for logical arguments if they aren't put on the defensive right away."

yeah, youre right about that. but actually i was trying to offend christians. still, that essay or whatever you call it has a long way to go before its readable. i think i made some points, but really it is mostly annoying pomposity.

Quote :

"3. The general structure is lacking ... I don't really know where to begin, but it's more like reading one side of a conversation than a serious paper. If you're going to stick with the religion thing, it's best to assume your readers understand what the religion is about otherwise you really will come off sounding like a dick. If you insist on explaining, use footnotes or endnotes, or just write an appendix. Historical evidence is good too."

i usually come off sounding like a dick. its kind of my thing. but point taken anyhow. again, i was writing off the top of my head. it wasnt meant to be a serious academic or professional piece.

Quote :

" 4. Avoid argumentative language in the title ... consider using something more neutral, like "as compared to" so that your target audience actually pauses long enough to read. "

avoid argumentative language? in teh soap box? ive been gone a while, did i miss something?

Quote :

" 5. "Less" "punctuation" "especially" "when" "you" "aren't" "listing" "your" "source" "

right right. but. anyhow. what i wrote, was, after all, a so-called, "rough draft"... like, as in. no proof reads. just a stream. of thought.

but thanks for your time. i guess i was interested in starting an argument over the topic, rather than a review on the mechanics of writing. i've already graduated, and i threw out my MLA.



[Edited on April 5, 2006 at 12:12 AM. Reason : ]

4/5/2006 12:10:19 AM

to be fair, I disagree with it and I read the first half.

4/5/2006 12:12:12 AM

my problem is, that im not an atheist. i tried to write something taking on the assumption of atheism, but i just cant really commit to it. because at my core, im an agnostic.

i mean, fundamentalist christians are about as pleasant as dogshit on the bottom of your shoe, but i cant really dig the extreme atheists much either. I prefer T.H. Huxley's definition of agnositicism, which i believe is pretty much in tune with the scientific method.

But anyhow, christians have no patent on morality. morality is independent of one's religion or lack thereof. and there's plenty of examples of so-called christians who claim to be right with god, but have apparently no qualms about violating any moral and ethical codes they can get away with.

4/5/2006 12:25:54 AM

be careful, there are plenty of examples of almost everything.

4/5/2006 12:48:13 AM

of course there are. but im weary of all the fundamentalist christian dogshit around here, like how atheists are somehow inherently immoral in other atheist thread. (that is, prior to where mcdanger hijacked it for one of his inane pedantic rants)

anyhow, atheists are necessairly neither more nor less moral than christians. which, really, was my whole point in posting this argumentum ad absurdum in the first place.




[Edited on April 5, 2006 at 1:25 AM. Reason : ]

4/5/2006 1:21:20 AM

Quote :

"(that is, prior to where mcdanger hijacked it for one of his inane pedantic rants)"

Better to err on the side of the pedant than the side of the flippant. This thread is living proof.

You've yet to demonstrate how my arguments are inane with any real substance.

4/5/2006 1:25:29 AM

because you bore me, son. i dont care to argue with a 22 year old who already knows everything.

4/5/2006 1:31:44 AM

On the contrary, I don't know everything.

I'm open to new ideas and good arguments. My opinions on matters shift as soon as I'm shown a good enough reason to shift them. I don't have a weird attachment to my position on things like most folks.

Either way, your insults are weak and you don't have the capital to pull them off. If the original post was a well-written argument, indicative of your sharp intellect and attention to detail, then your quips would mean something. However, nothing you've posted on these boards so far suggests that you're anything more than a pseudo-intellectual lazy ass, too concerned with his own vanity to learn something and too coarse to display what he can actually grasp.

Please, shock and amaze me and pick up a book. The best way to learn how to write is to read.

4/5/2006 1:37:21 AM

that would probably hurt me more if you hadn't already used it on five other people.

4/5/2006 1:39:28 AM

I'll even give you suggestions on what to read if you'd like

Just please, please stop being so painfully fucking stupid

4/5/2006 1:42:08 AM

now everyone split up and put these "merit" badges on...

4/5/2006 1:45:24 AM

McD: you seem to have this pathological compulsion to get the last word in. no matter what the argument is, or where.

you track down any percieved conflict, and pursue it until you completely grind the person down and they can't or wont respond to you any more.

this is some kind of neurotic behavior. I've seen it before, with people on the internet.

I wonder if its in the DSM IV. it seems kind of like a mixture of OCD and BPD.

anyhow, maybe you should consult with a doctor. there are medication that can releive what must be an all-consuming anxiety.

(and BTW, your "let me suggest a book" was cute... but not after the 5th or 6th time. if youre going to be an obsessive compulsive insult hound, you should really work on some new material)

4/5/2006 1:51:58 AM

^ I'm a contractor, I work in software development. My only real neurological problem is a lack of attention -- I need a constant diversion while I'm working. Typing on this forum is a good one -- so I do it while I code all day. It's why I'm on top of threads extremely fast.

I only suggest books to people who's display of ignorance is so astounding that I feel compelled to help them fill in the gaps.

4/5/2006 1:54:06 AM

see what i mean?

4/5/2006 1:55:59 AM

You have to realize, these are message boards. People are intended to reply to each other. If somebody continues to address me or attempt to unhinge one of my points, wouldn't you think it makes sense to respond?

4/5/2006 1:59:27 AM

you're always so negative

No I am not.

see what i mean

4/5/2006 8:00:55 AM

MickyD:

If you don't recommend a book to someone, does that mean that their ignorance is not astounding?
I feel a little hurt as I aim to be astounding in everything I do.

4/5/2006 11:00:30 PM