I wasn't saying you have to do anything. All I wanted was for you to agree that atheism has no moral standards. Thank you.
Atheist Music
- Thread starter UnripeArbiter
- Start date
I wasn't saying you have to do anything. All I wanted was for you to agree that atheism has no moral standards. Thank you.
You are right. Atheism imposes no moral standards.
It is up to each atheist to come up with their own moral standards. You seem to think it is a bad thing for people to independently decide what is right and wrong. I think it is a good thing.
It is up to each atheist to come up with their own moral standards. You seem to think it is a bad thing for people to independently decide what is right and wrong. I think it is a good thing.
OK, nothing is right. No moral standards. I'll accept this. (Even though in doing so I'm being paradoxical since I'm saying you are correct, while nothing can be correct...but let's just say hypothetically.... )
Would you agree that slavery in the Bible paved the way for the atrocity of slavery? Would you agree the Bible paves the way for the suppression of homosexual rights? Would you say the Qur'an paves the way for suicide bombers? Would say the Catholic church (somehow) paved the way to systematically sexually abuse children?
You only need to pick one... I'll pick in advance for you... You would probably say (just assuming) that the Qur'an paved the way for al-qaeda. Would you not? (Seems pretty direct in it's logic)
So theism, in reality, has no moral truth either. (Since theism encompasses both the Bible and the Qur'an.)
I should just ask you what your beliefs are because it makes it extremely difficult to argue with your "moral" "truths" if I don't know what theistic text your pulling them from? Please share your religion with us, since you know EXACTLY what our beliefs are.
I feel like both theists and atheists know something I don't (as an agnostic) because my belief is that human beings have no plausible fucking idea about any of this and its pretty pointless to devote significant time to guessing. I'm assuming I have one life and it would be best to not take it for granted preparing for something else.
if not be lost means joining a like minded group of people to believe in millennium old fairy tails (or more recent and comparably as ridiculous ideas) then sure I can see you point. I'm not an atheist, because I don't strongly believe there isn't a god, but I do strongly believe your God makes no sense. And I'm going to give a possible creator of the universe a little more credit then the people who think they've got it all figured out.
if not be lost means joining a like minded group of people to believe in millennium old fairy tails (or more recent and comparably as ridiculous ideas) then sure I can see you point. I'm not an atheist, because I don't strongly believe there isn't a god, but I do strongly believe your God makes no sense. And I'm going to give a possible creator of the universe a little more credit then the people who think they've got it all figured out.
To sum it up
sky cake
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55h1FO8V_3w]YouTube - Patton Oswalt - Sky Cake[/ame]
sky cake
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55h1FO8V_3w]YouTube - Patton Oswalt - Sky Cake[/ame]
If you're agnostic (I am too) you have no idea if a god exists or not right........? Yes. [This deals with knowledge of a god. ]
If you have no idea if a god exists or not (neither do I) then why on Earth would you believe in a god? Of course you don't and you wouldn't/shouldn't.... So you're also an atheist... You're an agnostic atheist. Simple as that.
I just shorthand it to atheist for myself. (since I'm fairly confident that there is no god ) You may be less sure than I, but you still don't believe in a god. (How could you? You're agnostic.) But your still an atheist...
Unless.......... you're an agnostic deist. Which is a contradiction in terms. (You'd be a confused person, IMO)
Basically, this is what you don't understand:
Agnosticism deals in knowledge, deism/theism deals in belief.
---------------------
I also agree that "it's pretty pointless to devote significant time to guessing." It is worthwhile, however, to try and convince others that they're wasting their time, as you stated. (<--- although that was not the intent of this thread nor do I believe it's even possible)
---------------------
Also, you may shorthand your beliefs as agnostic (since you aren't as certain as I) but still.... you're an atheist. (Unless, again, you are a confused agnostic deist, lol. <--probably not) So don't hate on your own kind..... It comes off as, I dunno, ignorant.
technically im a weak agnostic. I am not an atheist because an atheist believes there is no god, and i dont believe there is no god, I believe I don't have the information necessary to form an opinion either way and anything beyond that is pure speculation.
think about how annoyed you are when people try to convince you there is a specific God, thats how equally annoying you are when you try to convince them there isn't. Its an entirely personal thing, supported completely by faith and intuition, and since I don't claim some higher level knowledge that others don't have, I'm not going to preach either way. Thats what I consider treating people how I want to be treated.
Also your entire argument on knowledge vs belief is purely semantic.
I'm only responding to the theists... I haven't provoked a single thing.... (So I'm the one being annoyed.)
Yes, were only arguing semantics.
" I believe I don't have the information necessary to form an opinion either way and anything beyond that is pure speculation. " I can agree with that, isn't there a specific term for this?
See if I was trying to convince hellblazer of something, my argument would go as such:
You do realize how petty and narcissistic that behavior is in a deity right? "They did not worship me correctly, therefore they die!" Not to mention that completely contradicts any possibility of true free will whatsoever.
Come on man, pretend its just a story for a minute, and now look at it.
/
But it won't matter, because no matter what my argument is, some post on the internet is not going to unseat him from his dogma (and rightfully so, since someone would be quite unprincipled if thats all it took). Its better to abstain from these debates, even if it feels like an itch you really want to scratch. No one ever wins these arguments, and time can be better spent.
Also, this isn't true.
Atheists just have absence of belief just like you.
I still think you're an agnostic atheist.
But still just arguing semantics.
i disgree, they do not have an absence of belief, they have a speficic belief in there NOT being a god.
Otherwise, what would the term for that be (a strong belief there is no god)?
This sums me up: Weak agnosticism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia call it whatever you want.
also to the original point of this thread, the best "atheist music" imo is Tool, which is just awesome music in general.
From your article: Weak agnosticism.
"Weak agnosticism often overlaps with, and is often confused with, weak atheism, as both are a lack of belief rather than a belief in lack (of either knowledge or existence, respectively)."
From the weak atheism article:
"atheism has generally been considered an active disbelief in gods, except by starting instead with the broader definition of atheism which includes any absence of belief in gods and thus encompasses some forms of agnosticism (see agnostic atheism)."
-----------------
I am an agnostic only to the extent that I am agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden.
—Richard Dawkins
—Richard Dawkins
That's alright. That's all I needed. We have the second atheist to admit they have no moral standards. It is all in the eye of the beholder.
Which means if there is no right, and there is no wrong, atheists have no right to tell others that their system is 'better' or 'worse' than others, since 'better' or 'worse' are all subjective and in the eye of the beholder.
And even if one atheist says religion is 'bad' because of the deaths it purportedly caused, another atheist could say religion is 'good' for the very same reason. Who are you to tell me death or murder is 'wrong' when I set my own morals?
In this light, there is no 'ideology' that is better. Atheism, theism, religion - all are placed on the same level playing field and no man can say one is better than the other.
You seem to define atheism as not believing in a god that could be there. That's the same as saying that I specifically don't believe there is NO flying spaghetti monster, but their could be.
It's simple. Atheism is the default, anything else is supposition and speculation.
have you read the bible? do you think there is sound "morality" advocated in it (esp in the old testament)?
i do define it that way. I define it as "there is no god". Not no christian god, or no islamic god, or no hindi gods, just as there is no god at all period. As the concept of god itself is fairly broad, to me that is supposition. It can't be the default, because it is equally as plausible either way.
so, using the way that is it not generally considered then can fit your meaning. ok.
Let's accept your characterization of the Old Testament God for a second.
Think about why you're saying you don't believe he exists.
You've built an idea in your head of what a possible God would look like.
And the reason you reject Noah's God is because he doesn't match up with your idea of what a God should be. In your mind, your perfect God wouldn't be 'narcissistic' and 'petty'(Not that I necessarily agree with that characterization).
That's your objection. You're basically saying, "God doesn't exist because he's meaner than I thought he would be."
When in reality, if a God existed, he would be what he is regardless of what you wanted or wished for him to be. He would have whatever personality he had regardless of what you wanted. That's just a simple fact.
I don't even need to go there. I'm still debunking atheists' claim that atheism is better than religion, when by their own standards, a concrete definition of 'better' doesn't even exist.