|
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
With regards to Judeo-Christian-Islamic theology, I am a strong atheist. But I am an agnostic in that I cannot rule out the possibility that something exists which someone, somewhere, might call (a) "God."
|
Gotcha.
| quote: |
If Christian theology is to be believed, I disagree that we have free will. What freedom is there to will when you can be punished for your choices? Does "free speech" exist when you are free to speak your mind but must face the consequences of being executed if the government doesn't like what you say? No, it doesn't, and neither does free will exist when you are free to act as you will but must face the consequences of condemnation if God doesn't like what you do.
If God existed then we would be little more than slaves subject to his will. The mundane "free will" we would have left would be comparable to the freedom a prison inmate has to decide when to use the toilet.
I'm glad I don't live a universe like that. I live in a universe where I am genuinely free to make the decisions that really matter in life. I am geniunely free to decide what I think is right and wrong on whatever basis I see fit. I can live my life by any philosophy I choose without the fear that some pseudo-benevolent God will punish me for refusing to conform with his narrow vision of a life worth living. To me, that is the very essence of a free life: a life where you aren't merely a sheep blindly following a supposedly righteous idol.
|
I see your point of view. I disagree, however. You say "If God existed then we would be little more than slaves are subject to his will." - No. It is proof at this very moment against that, according to what I believe in. God exists, right now, and you choose to not believe in God. Are you a sheep? No. Am I? No. I have the free will to choose whether to believe or not believe in God. I understand this is circular logic - I am just explaining how I see it, from the other side of the fence.
| quote: |
But how righteous could this idol which demands your blind faith really be? It has provided you with no objective standard by which to determine that blind faith in it - as opposed to blind faith in any other amont innumerable and possibly infinite alternatives - is the correct decision. Then, if you choose to place your faith elsewhere, you are to be punished, even though you weren't given any reliable reason to believe in any one of the options over another. In essence, under such a God your life is a mere cast of the dice. You have no way to know what to have faith in, and if you don't pick exactly the right thing you lose. Such policies aren't righteous, they are sadistic. How can one believe in such a universe or such a God?
|
I've always liked an Aristotle quote for this type of question: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." -- As you read that, you say - Hey! That's me! -- But is it? I think if you truely look at religion with an open mind (it's hard, I know) - you will feel something - you will have an "experience" - that can only be described as supernatural. I used to be on the opposite side of the table, and some of me still is (I disagree with a lot of things originized religion stand for and do) - but my point is - if you've honestly let go of self pride and self-appointed chairs of intellectual superiority and given religion and God a chance - you will know.
As for not believing in one or the other... I study Eastern religions (mainly Daoism, venturing into Buddhism next) - and I consider myself a Christian. I think God promotes an open thinking and understanding of things, it's man who has construed societies "believe in this religion or DIE!" type of attitude.
| quote: |
You've missed the point entirely. I don't have anything against pleasure or desire, but they are small matters compared to what we would lose if we were merely God's toys. In a universe under God, what you want for yourself is always secondary to what God wants for you. What you think you ought to do is secondary to what God wants you to do. You do not own yourself, you are merely a piece of God's property: a slave, a puppet, a mere object. It would be better to be a stone if you ask me: at least the stone is an object incapable of realizing that it is merely an object. To be human in a universe under God: I can think of little worse!
|
You are right. In the universe I live in, what God wants for you does come first. However, at least in my logic, what God wants for me is what I want for me as well. You say I am a slave, a puppet - I disagree and consider myself a servant. I serve but I also enjoy the world that God has put me on. God didn't make slaves and puppets, he made free-willed humans that can CHOOSE to embrace him or not embrace him.
You say... to be a human in a universe under God: I can think of little worse!
Well, I say... to be a human in your universe, one where everything we do is for no greater good, for no divine purpose - only to live and die - souls and personalities and dreams and love all washed away by the mortal coil, never to be remembered or seen again - I can think of no worse way to live.
| quote: |
I don't murder and don't steal for a variety of reasons, the least of which are fear of punishment and conscience. Conscience is little more than a little basic anthropology: I have assimilated from those around me a basic conception of what is considered "right" and "wrong." Were I less intelligent, I might think those acts were inherently right or wrong. But as I am aware that I am only inclined to view them as such due to the prevalance of that opinion, and because I know that such arguments from popular opinion is fallacious reasoning I place little value on those instincts. Similarly, while I am not eager to face punishment for crimes, I would not allow that alone to deter me as it is also fallacious reasoning (argumentum ad baculum).
|
Interesting self-appointed intelligence factor here. Pride is a funny thing, isn't it?
If you live your life on the what society deems "right" and "wrong" - isn't it a bit hypocritical coming from someone who has deemed themselves smarter than over 95% of the world? I mean hell, with of these religious nuts making up laws and such... why can't you, the self-appointed intellectual superior of every religious person out there, make better laws? Why not ask *yourself* - who is smarter than the rest - what *you* think is right and wrong? Perhaps you and other humanist/atheist persons could form your own utopian community, far away from the primitive religious nutjobs that are running the world today?
/rant off
| quote: |
Instead, the foremost reason why I avoid crimes such as murder or theft is that I simply do not want to partake in them. To me, they represent a failure in one's own ability to be self-sufficient and self-empowered. If I must steal to obtain those things that I want, it means that I am probably unable to obtain them through my own efforts and must exploit others in order to do so. And if I kill someone for no reason but mere spite, it means I was so much weaker than them mentally or psychologically that they influenced me to such a degree as to resort to such an act. My ego simply will not allow me to pursue either course.
|
Interesting way at looking at life... I'll leave at that.
| quote: |
I respect beliefs which are well-founded, and I respect opinions regardless of their origin. I have no quarrel with the moral opinions of believers - though I may have a problem with the actions they take as a result of those opinions. However I feel an obligation as a member of the human species to endeavor to assist other humans in living more fulfilling lives: a goal to which, in my view, blind faith is an obstacle. I perceive the belief in itself to be harmful, like a disease no only in that it harms the individual who has it but also able to spread from one person to another - particularly people in a weakened mental state such as the seriously ill or young children. That is, precisely, why I do not respect it.
|
In this we're in partial agreement. I also have problems with the actions taken as a result of our beliefs.
In your pursuit of making others lives "more fulfilling" - you're really fighting a losing battle. If you're right - and religion is untrue - it is of no importance. It is simply a way people live their lives and are happy with. It's if it is true - then it is of major importance. Don't take that away from people.
On this topic - do you believe your outlook on life (what I consider a "humanistic" view") - is healthy for society? If our own moral and ethical principles are based on nothing more than what the society "norm" is? What is our greater purpose? What moral and ethical baseline do we use?
It saddens me to see more and more people taking this philosophical outlook on life... but I'm curious to hear what you have to say.
| quote: |
It is true that many people do not want to be assisted in this manner. Most alcoholics and others suffering from addiction do not see their condition as a problem and do not want to be helped either. But faith seems to me very much like an addiction: a serious and adverse condition which, if you can, you ought to assist someone in overcoming. |
A neo-Darwinian crusader. You're a piece of work, Arbiter. Respectfully, of course.
|