|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: What exactly does atheism have to offer?
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
I read the following comment on another thread:
quote:
Originally posted by REALLYMAD
I'm a BBC Religion MB refugee. My reason for being there? I guess I got tired of seeing all the blinkered Biblebots lording it up over anyone with a differing opinion. After a while I discovered that my input in certain debates had indeed made not one but two people question their religion and open their eyes. As the more seasoned posters will already be aware this is extremely rare, whatever side of the fence you sit. To me it justified all the time I spent in there.
This poster clearly felt that it was worth the effort to convince people of his "message" - his "gospel", as it were - which sounds, of course, like the message of atheism, judging by the content of the rest of his post.
Of course, Richard Dawkins has expressed his desire to convert people to atheism.
My question is really this: why?
What exactly is the "good news" of atheism, to which it is worth trying to convert people?
I'd be intrigued to see how our resident atheists answer this question.
[ 01. December 2012, 10:43: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
What exactly is the "good news" of atheism, to which it is worth trying to convert people?
I'd say the absence of a Cosmic Judge who will send you to eternal damnation for not doing (or even believing) the right things is a definite plus point.
The freedom to be what and who you want to be rather that having to be who God wants you to be (whether you like it or not) is also very appealing.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
This poster clearly felt that it was worth the effort to convince people of his "message" - his "gospel", as it were - which sounds, of course, like the message of atheism, judging by the content of the rest of his post.
Of course, Richard Dawkins has expressed his desire to convert people to atheism.
My question is really this: why?
What exactly is the "good news" of atheism, to which it is worth trying to convert people?
I think this highlights one of the big differences between theistic and atheistic thought. Atheists tend to approach a proposition from the perspective of "is this true?" According to EE, the theistic approach is more along the lines of "which would I prefer to be true?" or "which 'good news' would be more advantageous for me personally?"
I can't answer for REALLYMAD, but I would answer that the truth has value in and of itself, regardless of personal preference.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
Croesus: quote:
I can't answer for REALLYMAD, but I would answer that the truth has value in and of itself, regardless of personal preference.
So converting someone to your own truth, which is undoubtedly true, is generally a Good Thing? Sounds familiar.
I can see why theists see atheism as a religious choice no matter how much atheists fuss and fume at the designation.
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Damn, I thought the answer was going to be tea and cake, and I was ready to sign up!
Atheists are as mixed bag of nuts as the rest of us, so the answer will vary.
ISTM, the Dawkins variety are under the delusion humanity will be less bastards to one another if God gets out of the way. What I call the Dawkins Delusion.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
goperryrevs
Shipmtae
# 13504
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I'd say the absence of a Cosmic Judge who will send you to eternal damnation for not doing (or even believing) the right things is a definite plus point.
An alternative solution to that (i.e. other than atheism) is just having a less fucked up view of God.
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
The freedom to be what and who you want to be rather that having to be who God wants you to be (whether you like it or not) is also very appealing.
I get that, but isn't that what God, assuming (s)he exists, lets us do anyhow, by giving us the old free will thing?
--------------------
"Keep your eye on the donut, not on the hole." - David Lynch
Posts: 2098 | From: Midlands | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
I can't answer for REALLYMAD, but I would answer that the truth has value in and of itself, regardless of personal preference.
Yes, but a disinterested truth is, by definition, not something that one gets particularly wound up about. I thought EE was more interested in what someone like Dawkins was getting so excited about. It is rather odd that some athiests are so damnedably evangelical about it. I tend to attribute it to an unpleasant personal history with folks who claim to speak for the Almighty, but I really don't know.
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Croesos
...I would answer that the truth has value in and of itself, regardless of personal preference.
I agree. That is why I am not an atheist, because, as far as I can see, the evidence for it doesn't stack up.
But your comment implies the following question:
How do you define "truth"?
And why would you want to convert people to your understanding of the truth?
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
TomOfTarsus
Shipmate
# 3053
|
Posted
You know, Croesus is correct. There absolutely is value to the truth. Jesus set a very high value on it. And the trouble is that somehow the debate starts to sound like Marvin states, "here's the truth and if you don't follow it you are going to Hell."
But Jesus had a much more positive take on it, and I'm sure many here are familiar with it "If you continue in My word, you are my disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free. (emphasis added) Sounds good to me!
(Lyda Rose, I substantially agree with you as well, esp. with the likes of poor Dawkins.)
Just an aside...
Tom
ETA, cp'd with tclune and EE
ETC: typos... ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
[ 01. October 2012, 15:59: Message edited by: TomOfTarsus ]
--------------------
By grace are ye saved through faith... not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath ... ordained that we should walk in them.
Posts: 1570 | From: Pittsburgh, PA USA | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Liopleurodon
Mighty sea creature
# 4836
|
Posted
Dawkins is not so much trying to spread atheism as trying to spread a certain kind of materialism-oriented critical thinking which tends to go with atheism. And the benefits of that are not so much around making the individual feel better as for making society move forward.
I can see a lot of benefits, largely because I see a lot of people being hurt by other people's religion. But anyone asking what atheism does for me personally is missing the point.
Posts: 1921 | From: Lurking under the ship | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
I can't answer for REALLYMAD, but I would answer that the truth has value in and of itself, regardless of personal preference.
Yes, but a disinterested truth is, by definition, not something that one gets particularly wound up about. I thought EE was more interested in what someone like Dawkins was getting so excited about. It is rather odd that some athiests are so damnedably evangelical about it. I tend to attribute it to an unpleasant personal history with folks who claim to speak for the Almighty, but I really don't know.
--Tom Clune
Some of the Gnus argue that society would be nicer without religion, but this seems to me an unsubstantiated argument. I suppose the standard ploy is to point to Sweden or somewhere like that, and say, that's a nice place and they're not religious.
The point about truth is interesting, as some Gnus do seem to get very excited that religion is not true. Truth seems to become a kind of 'cause'.
There are various ideas that religion is infantile, primitive, and so on, and that, I suppose, it's 'time to grow up'.
And for some, science is pretty neat, what else do you need?
There is also a tendency to point to 'bad religion', such as creationism, and argue that that is where it gets you, and you are better of without it.
Actually, it is all a bit frothy.
[ 01. October 2012, 16:05: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
What exactly is the "good news" of atheism, to which it is worth trying to convert people?
I'd say the absence of a Cosmic Judge who will send you to eternal damnation for not doing (or even believing) the right things is a definite plus point.
Can't see how that requires atheism. Plenty of theistic options that exclude the trigger-happy god.
quote:
The freedom to be what and who you want to be rather that having to be who God wants you to be (whether you like it or not) is also very appealing.
I suppose that depends on what and who you think God wants you to be. Near as I can tell, what God wants people to be is honest and kind.
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
ISTM, the Dawkins variety [of atheists] are under the delusion humanity will be less bastards to one another if God gets out of the way. What I call the Dawkins Delusion.
Well said.
quote:
Originally posted by Liopleurodon:
Dawkins is not so much trying to spread atheism as trying to spread a certain kind of materialism-oriented critical thinking which tends to go with atheism.
If that's the case he sure picked a misleading name for his most famous book.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
Yes, but a disinterested truth is, by definition, not something that one gets particularly wound up about. I thought EE was more interested in what someone like Dawkins was getting so excited about. It is rather odd that some athiests are so damnedably evangelical about it. I tend to attribute it to an unpleasant personal history with folks who claim to speak for the Almighty, but I really don't know.
--Tom Clune
As far as Dawkins or anyone else working in the life sciences go, Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote something on an unrelated topic that is nonetheless quite relevant here.
quote:
Consider this: what if you were a medievalist and the majority of your public simply refused to accept that Charlemagne ever existed. Indeed, what if they felt their prosperity was contingent on not acknowledging it. And thus all your medievalist friends spent a great deal of time proving that Charlemagne did exist.
Think about all the other interesting questions you might never get to ask, because you were spending all your energy in refutation of myth. And this would be frustrating because surely you had true questions, questions which you actually didn't have answers for. But every time you presented your work before an audience you felt called back to 800 AD all over again.
I think about how the climate scientist, or the evolutionary biologist living in Tennessee must feel, and I find some sympathy.
There is a certain frustration dealing with those for whom "facts" are simply a matter of personal preference. That kind of thinking can bleed over into other areas. For instance, there's no particular reason that climate change denialism should be significantly higher among American evangelicals than it is among Americans generally, and yet that's the case in every poll I've ever seen address the question.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by goperryrevs:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I'd say the absence of a Cosmic Judge who will send you to eternal damnation for not doing (or even believing) the right things is a definite plus point.
An alternative solution to that (i.e. other than atheism) is just having a less fucked up view of God.
Less fucked up than the traditional, biblical view?
Some people try to make God look better by saying that the damned are in hell by their own choice, that the door to hell is locked on the inside, and so on. But that's not the point - the point is that if there's no God and no eternal consequences then there's no hell to worry about at all, you can just get on with living your life the way that seems best to you.
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
The freedom to be what and who you want to be rather that having to be who God wants you to be (whether you like it or not) is also very appealing.
I get that, but isn't that what God, assuming (s)he exists, lets us do anyhow, by giving us the old free will thing?
OK, the freedom to be what and who you want without there being any eternal consequences of that choice.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
How do you define "truth"?
That's the problem. And "Truth" is even more of a problem. I too can't answer for atheists because I'm not one, but I think some adherents of scientism have a problem in seeing that even if the foundational stories of a religion are fictional, they can also be true. I find truth in King Oedipus, Antigone, Ovid, Chaucer, Dante, Shakespeare, Dickens, Maugham, Tom Sharpe and Douglas Adams; in Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Caravaggio, El Greco, Turner, Van Gogh, Cezanne, Munch, Picasso, Mark Rothko, Joseph Beuys, and Cy Twombley; in De Machaut, Desprez, Byrd, Sheppard, Tallis, Praetorius, Vivaldi, Handel, Bach (oh, Bach!), Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven ... and you see where I'm going with this. They connect with me in the same kind of way that religious notions do, a way that quickens my heart, broadens my vision, and lights up the world around me and its people - especially its people. That's truth, for me.
I have never seen that kind of truth in an equation. Only the kind that I see in my shopping list.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Can't see how that requires atheism. Plenty of theistic options that exclude the trigger-happy god.
Universalism is the only one that works the way I want it to. And even that has some pretty big problems.
quote:
quote:
The freedom to be what and who you want to be rather that having to be who God wants you to be (whether you like it or not) is also very appealing.
I suppose that depends on what and who you think God wants you to be. Near as I can tell, what God wants people to be is honest and kind.
Right now my main issue (problem? Challenge?) is around the requirement to be charitable. If there's no God then I don't have to give any of my hard-earned cash away in order to avoid the fiery pits.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
In relation to truth, I would say that science does not aim for truth or reality, as they are philosophical considerations.
Science is a practical tool, not a philosophical discipline. Thus, its methodology is naturalistic, but this has no implications philosophically or metaphysically.
But my sense is that some atheists confuse science with philosophy, or they are always wandering back and forth across the boundary, without even realizing that they are.
[ 01. October 2012, 16:25: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
Right now my main issue (problem? Challenge?) is around the requirement to be charitable. If there's no God then I don't have to give any of my hard-earned cash away in order to avoid the fiery pits.
As I understand it, my particular version of theism doesn't bind people to that kind of legalism, but is more concerned with what kind of person you are. So if you are "a good tree" (to use a biblical analogy) then you will unfailingly bring forth "good fruit". That means you don't need to think about what you do with your money, because you will do good with it anyway, whether you spend it, donate it or save it.
After all, spending money for oneself creates much needed jobs...
--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis
Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
If there's no God then I don't have to give any of my hard-earned cash away in order to avoid the fiery pits.
Even atheist misers are shits.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
Marvin, merely giving your hard earned cash as insurance against the fiery pit won't work. You couldn't afford the premiums by an attenuated stick of sedimentary calcite, I'm afraid.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
quote:
Originally posted by Croesos
...I would answer that the truth has value in and of itself, regardless of personal preference.
But your comment implies the following question:
How do you define "truth"?
And why would you want to convert people to your understanding of the truth?
First off, that's two questions. To answer the second question first, I refer you to my statement which you quoted. Why would anyone want to spread the truth? Because "the truth has value in and of itself".
As for defining truth, that's a bit of a tangent. My main point was that your self-interested approach, that the validity of a proposition can be determined by weighing what's 'on offer' and then picking whatever is most personally beneficial, doesn't seem to be any more than coincidentally likely to work.
--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto
Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amika
Shipmate
# 15785
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Of course, Richard Dawkins has expressed his desire to convert people to atheism.
My question is really this: why?
What exactly is the "good news" of atheism, to which it is worth trying to convert people?
I'd be intrigued to see how our resident atheists answer this question.
My answer is that there is no 'good news' of atheism. On the contrary, being an atheist is not a particularly joyous experience, generally speaking.
I see no point whatsoever in trying to 'convert' people to atheism, and nor do I believe the world would suddenly turn into candy floss if everyone forswore religion.
I say believe whatever you like, because it's all meaningless in the end! My 'truth' is as irrelevant as your 'truth'.
Posts: 147 | From: Ingerland | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
TomOfTarsus
Shipmate
# 3053
|
Posted
Solomon? Is that you? ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
By grace are ye saved through faith... not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath ... ordained that we should walk in them.
Posts: 1570 | From: Pittsburgh, PA USA | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I don't know whether this is a minor point or not, but some areas of atheism seem to be quite angry at theists. Thus, a blogger such as PZ Myers rages at religion, theists, and their weird beliefs and behaviours.
Thus, if you want this, atheism can provide the space for you to be very angry, to ridicule theists, to tell them they are childish, that they believe in a sky god, rather like Santa. Or you could do some dramatic stuff, like piercing a communion wafer with a nail.
You can also get into some stuff about the 'inescapable conflict between science and religion'; you can be very self-righteous about all the horrible things that theists do and think; you can do secular sermons about how evil it all is; or about how wonderful it will be without religion; so all in all, it sounds a lot of fun.
[ 01. October 2012, 17:54: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian
Right now my main issue (problem? Challenge?) is around the requirement to be charitable. If there's no God then I don't have to give any of my hard-earned cash away in order to avoid the fiery pits.
As I understand it, my particular version of theism doesn't bind people to that kind of legalism, but is more concerned with what kind of person you are.
The change of emphasis is noted, but it doesn't change the underlying issue.
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Even atheist misers are shits.
But if there's no God then it doesn't matter - they don't have to worry about it or try to change themselves if they don't want to.
quote:
Originally posted by daronmedway:
Marvin, merely giving your hard earned cash as insurance against the fiery pit won't work. You couldn't afford the premiums by an attenuated stick of sedimentary calcite, I'm afraid.
Just one more reason why atheism is the more appealing philosophy. If I can't change my eternal fate anyway then why wouldn't I prefer the version that spares me the everlasting barbecue?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012
|
Posted
I think abandoning your current view of Christianity in favour of atheism is a good idea, Marvin. The abandonment of misconceptions is always a positive step.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingale
Shipmate
# 16599
|
Posted
I have yet to meet a true atheist. Almost every one of them acts in a way consistent with the acknowledgement of some sort of limited aspect of God - Justice, Truth, Knowledge, Enlightenment, Fairness, Kindness.
Very few people will say that it's OK to wrong someone if they have no way of finding out that you did it. Almost everyone, when confronted with a situation they feel is unjust, will appeal to some sort of extrinsic Right and Wrong.
Even the militant Dawkins atheists that ridicule and try to convert the religious to atheism are doing so in the pursuit of some sense of scientific or human advancement away from superstition. And, boy, do they hate it when you point out that they're just as evangelical as a Baptist on a street corner.
Posts: 679 | From: Connectilando | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
personally I don't see the point of proselytizing in any direction. Why do we have to have clubs and in-crowds? anyway.
I read a thing floating around on facebook this morning that I thought very relevant. to summarize (and likely over-simplify) it said, when atheists do good they do it for the sake of doing good, not out of fear of eternal damnation or out of a need to please a cosmic parent - they do good because good needs to be done. to take it further, when there is a need, rather than offering prayer or whatever, if an atheist is a good person they just step up to help in a tangible, material way. which is often more useful than warm fuzzy thoughts. The little image/thing went on to say that believers should then think like atheists when faced with fellow humans in need; meaning, don't help because you want to make God happy with you, help because someone needs help.
again, over-simplifying, but I found it a good little something to chew on.
And I'll be honest - once I rejected organized religion and felt more a part of the Lost Masses - I am a better person in the giving and forgiving department. It says more about me, perhaps, than religious belief. But it's true, and I know I'm not alone.
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
comet
I notice you mention 'good persons'. What do you mean by this?
Do you think there are bad persons or evil persons?
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingale:
I have yet to meet a true atheist. Almost every one of them acts in a way consistent with the acknowledgement of some sort of limited aspect of God - Justice, Truth, Knowledge, Enlightenment, Fairness, Kindness.
Very few people will say that it's OK to wrong someone if they have no way of finding out that you did it. Almost everyone, when confronted with a situation they feel is unjust, will appeal to some sort of extrinsic Right and Wrong.
when did atheism become synonymous with selfish-asshole-ism? I don't think being a good person means you by definition believe in god.
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
comet
I notice you mention 'good persons'. What do you mean by this?
Do you think there are bad persons or evil persons?
I'm assuming you mean where I said
quote:
if an atheist is a good person they just step up to help in a tangible, material way
I certainly wasn't implying there's some deep character judgement, I meant if they are basically kind and generous, as opposed to selfish/greedy/miserly/judgmental/basically a dickweed. That's not a judgement on atheists, all belief systems have selfish assholes. I don't believe that people come in categories of good or bad. we all have the capability of doing good or being a shit.
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Organ Builder
Shipmate
# 12478
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingale:
I have yet to meet a true atheist.
I have run across this attitude before; I don't think it is really any more constructive than saying "I have yet to meet a true Christian."
It may well be that most non-religious people are more agnostic than atheistic, but there are definitely people who do not believe in God in any sense. Some of them even manage to be quite nice people who aren't scaring the horses or molesting children. Some of them do good things in the community. The fact that they have a strong sense of justice or some other moral virtue does not show that their atheism is lacking; it shows that religion does not have a monopoly on such qualities.
Perhaps instead of worrying about what atheism has to offer, we would be better off worrying why, however we choose to define it*, Christianity is less attractive than atheism to so many people. We claim, after all, that we have Good News. Maybe it should look like we believe it.
*because I know Shipmates are a varied lot.
--------------------
How desperately difficult it is to be honest with oneself. It is much easier to be honest with other people.--E.F. Benson
Posts: 3337 | From: ...somewhere in between 40 and death... | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
SusanDoris
Incurable Optimist
# 12618
|
Posted
Love the title! Have been writing a response, but it's going to need some editing, so back tomorrow. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.
Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mockingale:
I have yet to meet a true atheist. Almost every one of them acts in a way consistent with the acknowledgement of some sort of limited aspect of God - Justice, Truth, Knowledge, Enlightenment, Fairness, Kindness.
Except that we'd say that we don't think they are aspects of God. But if that's what floats your boat, fine.
We don't know at what point our ancestors could be said to have acquired an interest in Justice, Truth, Knowledge, Enlightenment, Fairness, Kindness but I'd guess some of them might well have come before any religion or belief in God. Certainly among higher apes (one hesitates, in this company, to say 'primates') we see behavior which many would call fairness & kindness. Where the capital letters start or belief in God starts I've no idea.
I don't think of my atheism as a substitute for religion or that it makes me better or worse in any particular way. I have no desire to convert anyone to anything (except more charity in their dealings with others - which applies equally to atheists and believers).
My analogy might be that an atheist is maybe like a blind person in a sighted world. You say "You'd be much happier if you saw - just believe and you will" but I can't even imagine what it would be like. You point to something and say the colours are wonderful - I say I can't imagine what you are talking about. The words just don't make sense.
I deliberately chose an analogy which makes religion seem a better option. Philosophical charity. I could have use my inability to see any merit in some forms of art which others tell me are wonderful.
Epoche or 'whatever' as the sceptics used to say.
--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)
Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by comet:
I read a thing floating around on facebook this morning that I thought very relevant. to summarize (and likely over-simplify) it said, when atheists do good they do it for the sake of doing good, not out of fear of eternal damnation or out of a need to please a cosmic parent - they do good because good needs to be done. to take it further, when there is a need, rather than offering prayer or whatever, if an atheist is a good person they just step up to help in a tangible, material way. which is often more useful than warm fuzzy thoughts. The little image/thing went on to say that believers should then think like atheists when faced with fellow humans in need; meaning, don't help because you want to make God happy with you, help because someone needs help.
This is tearing down a straw man imv. I don't help other people out of fear of God, nor to please God. I help other people now, not only through warm fuzzy thoughts but in many practical ways, because I love them. I'm better able to love them (even when they're not very lovable) thanks to the love of God that I receive through Christ.
I usually helped people before I was a Christian either because I felt sorry for them or because I hoped that they would do the same for me.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mark Betts
Ship's Navigation Light
# 17074
|
Posted
What does Atheism have to offer? Well, some say that you no longer have to fear eternal damnation for not being a good person.
However, IMO all atheism really offers is the certainty of eternal condemnation for everyone, good or bad - that's if you believe it.
Richard Dawkins fatherly smile doesn't make things any better, so no, it's not for me.
I can see this is going to be a very long thread (at least I hope so) - so have fun!
--------------------
"We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
Posts: 2080 | From: Leicester | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amika
Shipmate
# 15785
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TomOfTarsus:
Solomon? Is that you?
Ecclesiastes is certainly the one part of the Bible that struck a chord with me!
Posts: 147 | From: Ingerland | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
What does atheism have to offer? On mornings when you probably don't need to go to work (thanks to those who believed in a God who designated one day in seven for rest) you can sleep late.
[ 01. October 2012, 23:12: Message edited by: Alogon ]
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
Of course, Richard Dawkins has expressed his desire to convert people to atheism.
My question is really this: why?
What exactly is the "good news" of atheism, to which it is worth trying to convert people?
In McGrath's "The Dawkins Delusion?", he says it is moral autonomy.
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
More peaceful Sundays.
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas
Ship's Deserter
# 24
|
Posted
I read someone explain the feeling of liberation he found when he realised that as an atheist he could now be friends with whoever he liked.
Posts: 1894 | From: Thessalonica | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Demas:
I read someone explain the feeling of liberation he found when he realised that as an atheist he could now be friends with whoever he liked.
Why on earth should this be reserved for atheists?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Demas
Ship's Deserter
# 24
|
Posted
Dunno about 'should'. It's a tricky word. Clearly in this persons life, really existing atheism gave him clarity and freedom that his previous really existing Christianity didn't.
--------------------
They did not appear very religious; that is, they were not melancholy; and I therefore suspected they had not much piety - Life of Rev John Murray
Posts: 1894 | From: Thessalonica | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Betts:
However, IMO all atheism really offers is the certainty of eternal condemnation for everyone, good or bad
How do you figure?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
I'm really not interested in what it has to offer. I'm interested in whether it's true or not.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
@EtymologicalEvangelical
Well your question concerns the minority of atheists. The majority of us are not spending our time trying to convert people. Atheism does not have a good news as far as I can see. I think the atheists who are most active are motivated by politics. And wouldn't be active if the minority, (or powerful majority if you live in America) of people who profess to be Christians didn't use God as their reason to do hurtful things, force people to teach creationism etc. I'd argue that it starts with politics and empathy and if you are also an atheist you have the added bonus of also arguing, “....and what’s more God doesn't exist and here’s why”.
That's not to say there is an over all atheist agenda. Remember its only a vocal minority who parade their atheism like this.
So to answer the OP there is no good news in atheism people are just trying to stop the bad news of Christianity. Sucks for the good Christians of course but there you go.
The “absence of a Cosmic Judge”, “no hell”, “being able to lead your life how you want to” arguments don't work for me. In order to be concerned by these things wouldn't you have to believe in God? Also I agree when mousethief says, “Can't see how that requires atheism. Plenty of theistic options that exclude the trigger-happy god.”
@Adeodatus I'm not understanding how you are using the word truth here. When you say “even if the foundational stories of a religion are fictional, they can also be true ” it sounds like you are mixing up truth as in true or false and truth as in ….......what? Metaphor? Poetry? I ask because in all the debates I've seen where atheists are arguing that for example the garden of Eden story didn't happen they are arguing against bible literalism not the power of myth to reveal deeper meanings about humanity.
@Mockingale The not a true atheist argument you are using is one I've heard before. It's a bit of a tangent but certainty worthy of debate. It does seem though that you are arguing from the position that “we all know these things come from God therefore....” when you have not proven that first point. Is that what people call a presupposition?
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I'm really not interested in what it has to offer. I'm interested in whether it's true or not.
And I'd like a pony
--------------------
a theological scrapbook
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by George Spigot:
The “absence of a Cosmic Judge”, “no hell”, “being able to lead your life how you want to” arguments don't work for me. In order to be concerned by these things wouldn't you have to believe in God?
Yes, of course. That's why it's me saying them rather than an atheist.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I'm really not interested in what it has to offer. I'm interested in whether it's true or not.
And I'd like a pony
Look, you may not care much whether God actually exists or not, but it matters to me, OK?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
the long ranger
Shipmate
# 17109
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Look, you may not care much whether God actually exists or not, but it matters to me, OK?
But we've no way of telling for sure. So we're all back down to what makes sense, what feels right, what we experience, how we interpret it and how we find mental and/or spiritual stability with ourselves.
For me the question of what atheism 'has to offer' is the wrong one, akin to asking what Communism 'has to offer'. I don't think people make these choices of belief based on what they offer - which is a common misunderstanding perpetuated by religious bodies trying to get some sort of oneupmanship on one another.
What it has to offer is just an interpretation of the world that makes sense to a lot of people. What else is there to say?
--------------------
"..into the outer darkness where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth,” “But Rabbi, how can this happen for those who have no teeth?”
"..If some have no teeth, then teeth will be provided.”
Posts: 1310 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
