Reverse_Dragon is offline Reverse_Dragon Post #1  February 9,2012, 9:53am
Reverse_Drago…'s Avatar

w00t w00t! I is getting married! Success at last.

Enthusiast

Joined: Aug 2011

Louisville, KY

Posts: 693

See profile

I will be relocating posts from the politics thread regarding the nature (existence?) of morality from an atheistic world view.
jimmyh452 wrote :
Atheism makes absolutely no sense from any philosophical standpoint save for nihilism. Without a God, there's no purpose to life, thus not need for morality. Moral atheists are walking self contradictions. Nietzsche is the only philosopher of whom I'm aware that has consistent views on morality and atheism.

It's self limiting and frankly idiotic to behave morally if you don't believe in any purpose to life except for to the extent necessary to stay out of trouble. People are but mere chemical reactions that run for 70 years or so, coming and going into and out of existence. They're owed no more moral consideration than any other pile of atoms such as a pebble. True atheists should, for the sake of making sense, live completely self centered lives.

Morality is predicated on purpose which is dependent on design.
 
  Reply With Quote
Reverse_Dragon is offline Reverse_Dragon Post #2  February 9,2012, 9:56am
Reverse_Drago…'s Avatar

w00t w00t! I is getting married! Success at last.

Enthusiast

Joined: Aug 2011

Louisville, KY

Posts: 693

See profile

Jimmyh452 in black
Reverse_Dragon in red

wrote :
Atheism makes absolutely no sense from any philosophical standpoint save for nihilism. Without a God, there's no purpose to life, thus not need for morality. Moral atheists are walking self contradictions. Nietzsche is the only philosopher of whom I'm aware that has consistent views on morality and atheism.
Then you should read Kant, Hume, and Espinoza. Morality is dependent on far more then blind obeisance to authority. The morality of an action should be judged on that action's consequences, not just for the one taking the action, but for everyone impacted by said action.

wrote :
It's self limiting and frankly idiotic to behave morally if you don't believe in any purpose to life except for to the extent necessary to stay out of trouble.
You make the faulty assumption, common amongst theists, that without god-belief there can be no purpose to life. On the contrary, the purpose of life is self-evident. The purpose of life is to live. Morality then becomes a matter of ensuring quality of life for the maximum number of people possible.

wrote :
People are but mere chemical reactions that run for 70 years or so, coming and going into and out of existence. They're owed no more moral consideration than any other pile of atoms such as a pebble. True atheists should, for the sake of making sense, live completely self centered lives.
This is a nonsensical argument that tells us far more about your negative views about atheists than it does about morality. I love how you say 'mere chemical reactions'... as if a self-replicating chemical reaction honed over billions of years into a creature with the understanding and capability of a human is anything less than fantastically amazing. I would advise against citing other people's beliefs/behaviors at fascist in one post, and then telling an entire group of people whom you clearly dislike what they should be doing in the next. It's sort of a mixed message.

wrote :
Morality is predicated on purpose which is dependent on design.
 
  Reply With Quote
Reverse_Dragon is offline Reverse_Dragon Post #3  February 9,2012, 9:59am
Reverse_Drago…'s Avatar

w00t w00t! I is getting married! Success at last.

Enthusiast

Joined: Aug 2011

Louisville, KY

Posts: 693

See profile

jimmyh452 wrote :
I've read all of them and others. I majored in philosophy so I'm quite well read. What you describe is utilitarianism, not morality. Two things often misunderstood and confused by atheists.

You make the faulty assumption, common among atheists, that the purpose of something is the same as the thing itself. The purpose of life being living is akin to saying the purpose of a car existing is to exist. No, the purpose of a car existing to to be used for transportation. I'm not saying I am privy to the purpose of life, but I don't give up intellectually by arrogantly declaring something as absurd as "the purpose to life is to live". Again, what you're describing here is not morality, it's simply utilitarianism. Not remotely the same thing.



Equally nonsensical is to insist that order arose from nothing. 3 subatomic particles, combined in different configurations giving rise to a structured, ordered world happened by chance. Yes, mere chemical reactions.. without design. Just by chance. I wonder if I take my watch apart and put all the pieces in a box and shake it a few thousand time if it will magically put itself back together. That's essentially what atheists argue. That all of the complexity in nature, highly precise design of biological function all just popped into existence for no reason whatsoever.

I would advise against running around arrogantly talking down to anyone who doesn't subscribe to your godless lifestyle. It's funny to me that you subtly take jabs at theist all over this board and then get defensive when someone calls out the faulty logic behind your own "beliefs" or lack thereof.

Please tell me you don't believe Kant was an atheist...
My statements to which he was responding found in the post above.
 
  Reply With Quote
Reverse_Dragon is offline Reverse_Dragon Post #4  February 9,2012, 10:19am
Reverse_Drago…'s Avatar

w00t w00t! I is getting married! Success at last.

Enthusiast

Joined: Aug 2011

Louisville, KY

Posts: 693

See profile

Utilitarianism is an ethical framework... one of many. It is also called utilitarian morality. It is one of many consequentialist moral architectures, in contrast to the deontological morals of theistic religions.

You compare my statement that the purpose of life is to live to stating the purpose of a car existing is to exist. This is a false equivalency. We will never come to agreement on this for the very simple reason that from your perspective humans are designed objects (like a car) and to me they are not. I'll state again that utilitarianism is an ethical framework and therefor can fairly be termed a type of morality. Just not your type of morality. As for the purpose of life, in my opinion life has the purpose which we give it. I choose to give my life the purpose of living the best life I can, learning as much as I can in my short time, doing the most good for others I am able to, and raising happy healthy children to carry on my name. That is the purpose of life.

Ahh... wonderful. The old watch implies watchmaker argument. The idea that something arising from nothing is only nonsensical if you have an incomplete grasp of quantum mechanics. In point of fact, nothing almost always generates something. That's what nothing does. Also, evolution (both cosmological and biological) is not the same thing as chance. For more on this, read Climbing Mount Improbable by Richard Dawkins. Your argument on this point is a straw man. You are countering a claim that no one ever actually made. Life did not 'pop into existence for no reason whatsoever'... it evolved through painstakingly minute steps over countless generations across incomprehensible spans of deep time.

If I seem arrogant to you I apologize. We are discussing some of the most profound questions man has ever addressed, and I don't expect anyone to simply take my word for it. I do tend to argue from the assumption that my statements are correct, mostly because I find it difficult to operate from the opposite assumption. Also, my academic training has ingrained in me a tendency to vociferously defend my opinions with passion and aggression. Don't take it personally.

As for me 'subtly taking jabs at theists'... they aren't actually all that subtle. And feel free to question my logic, just don't expect me to buckle instantly and meekly creep away. I will defend my ideas.

No... Kant was not an atheist. He did, however, write extensively about creating ethical frameworks from the cultural dialectic rather than from authority, as I am sure you know.
 
  Reply With Quote
AudioDad is offline AudioDad Post #5  February 9,2012, 10:42am
AudioDad's Avatar

...has left the building

Enthusiast

Joined: Aug 2008

Posts: 800

See profile

jimmyh452 wrote :
Atheism makes absolutely no sense from any philosophical standpoint save for nihilism. Without a God, there's no purpose to life, thus not need for morality. Moral atheists are walking self contradictions. Nietzsche is the only philosopher of whom I'm aware that has consistent views on morality and atheism.
If this is what you require to get through the day/life, by all means go with it. Human life has meaning only because we say it does, regardless of what one's world view is. Claiming that one god or another is required for purpose and morality is equally nonsensical since all gods sprang from the minds of human beings. In any case, basing purpose and morality on the multitude of gods we've invented (and the multitude of interpretations of each one) over the millennia doesn't seem to have been a historical recipe for a moral world.

jimmyh452 wrote :
It's self limiting and frankly idiotic to behave morally if you don't believe in any purpose to life except for to the extent necessary to stay out of trouble.
Disingenuous at best. It's not just "staying out of trouble." Over the millennia, humans have learned that all benefit by cooperating and treating each other with respect and dignity. It ain't rocket science. It started at the tribal level and, as human interactions have become increasingly global in nature, it's clear that nations must find ways of getting along if we're to survive as a species. Obviously, as a species we still have much room for improvement in that arena. Whether one calls that utilitarian or 'moral' is utterly irrelevant. In any case, if you're basing your actions on bribes of eternal bliss or threats of eternal punishment, you're not really being 'moral'. You're just trying to stay out of trouble yourself.

jimmyh452 wrote :
People are but mere chemical reactions that run for 70 years or so, coming and going into and out of existence. They're owed no more moral consideration than any other pile of atoms such as a pebble.
Strictly speaking from the perspective of the rest of the universe, yes. The planet could be snuffed out of existence tomorrow and the rest of the galaxy/universe wouldn't know or care.

jimmyh452 wrote :
True atheists should, for the sake of making sense, live completely self centered lives.
What could be more self centered than believing that, in the vastness of the universe, there's an omnipotent, omniscient being that created this planet just for you (and those who think like you do) and takes an interest in your personal well being?

jimmyh452 wrote :
Morality is predicated on purpose which is dependent on design.
So, without this "purpose" you personally would be unable to function in society? You'd have no qualm with murdering, raping, stealing and just generally being a complete waste of skin? If so, then by all means please keep believing. The world has enough trouble as it is.
 
  Reply With Quote
shapeShifter79 is offline shapeShifter79 Post #6  February 10,2012, 3:13pm
shapeShifter7…'s Avatar

likes dancing!

Board Leader: Health & Wellness

Joined: Apr 2011

CA

Posts: 2,499

See profile

wrote :
Without a God, there's no purpose to life, thus not need for morality
If one chooses to live--perhaps because one finds existance and all it entails (sex, fast cars, gastronomy, love, charity) compelling--there's at least one purpose: to live!

American Heritage wrote :
Morality - A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct.
With a purpose defined, we can begin to define right conduct. We can even do so objectively!

Moral #1: Do not drink Drano-O

(We could say this another way: "Dran-O is not good for you.")

It's possible to go much deeper and define virtues that are life-promoting, such as honesty. There are philosophers who have done this in a compelling way. There are also childrens' tales that make the reason for virtues understandeable even to little ones, such as "The Boy Who Cried Wolf".
 
  Reply With Quote
Reply


« dropdeadredtx's incredibly deep question! | Religion & Spirituality | War On Religion? »
Topic Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new topics
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Topics
Topic Topic Starter Board Replies Last Post
Morality Issue Botenmaru About You 57 September 8,2010 3:40am
Is it a question of morality? DennisWisconsin Atheists, Humorists, and Science 11 July 24,2010 2:49am
Morality: what is it? WYskywatcher2 Christian Singles 27 July 16,2010 9:07pm
Fall Down Seven Times Get Up Eight. Other Sources of Morality DennisWisconsin Atheists, Humorists, and Science 21 May 13,2010 2:16pm
"What would _______ do?" Who best exemplifies YOUR morality? eHA_Admin_Lori About You 12 February 1,2010 6:12pm

Looking for a Great Relationship?

Get started now. Fill out this form and take the questionnaire to receive your matches.

First Name:

I'm a:
seeking

Postal Code:

Country:

Email:

Confirm Email:

Password:


How did you hear about us?


Latest on our Dating Advice Discussion Boards

“ Excellent, thank you. I think I will leave out the first part, I think it is unnecessary information to give him. I'm not interested in putting myself out there like that and it might be a little ... ” –  generallyyou

Join the “Ending a friendship” discussion

“Alfred Hitchcock - 18 Steven Spielberg - 62 *notice what?” –  dmi

Join the “War of the Directors” discussion

“ I would be "certain people" :P The issue isn't a deal-breaker, but a very strong factor preference-wise, for me.” –  ThePriestess

Join the “How much does race play in your dating someone?” discussion

“Love Texas Hold'em!.. I'm thinking of trying another tournament this summer...not sure yet though.. Never entered a tournament before, outside of online ones. Personally I prefer to play with ... ” –  Freezepop

Join the “Favorite Card Game” discussion

“Make that 3! I also had a crush on Donny Osmond. I think I still have a record or two of his. Suzie ” –  legend29

Join the “Robin Gibbs Dead at 62...How Deep is Your Love?” discussion

“Oh, my revised profile can be seen in the forum in the section where you can ask for a profile review. Suzanne” –  SuzanneScorpio

Join the “Photo Review” discussion

“Just remember, everything that you are feeling and/or are capable of he is as well. If he wanted to reach you, he could. Right now he knows that you are hurting, and that this is not what you ... ” –  lynntlb78

Join the “Can I wait and move on at the same time?” discussion

“ Yohio. And the shortened form (Anya) is nice too.” –  ThePriestess

Join the “Where is Becky?!?” discussion



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 9:41am.

Discussion Boards Archive

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0