News:

Look, I haven't mentioned Zeus, Buddah, or some religion.

Main Menu

I can't stand Trump or Christians. How do I get over this?

Started by MatureMcLeod, January 11, 2017, 12:25:59 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Dredge

Quote from: Pasta Chick on March 16, 2017, 01:53:30 PM
Only someone utterly lacking in empathy could be having a hard time with this.
Empathy.  Why is it necessary to have empathy?  A shark lacks empathy but survives just fine.  If a shark doesn't need empathy, why should a human?
Follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Arturo

Quote from: Dredge on March 20, 2017, 04:26:13 AM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on March 16, 2017, 01:53:30 PM
Only someone utterly lacking in empathy could be having a hard time with this.
Empathy.  Why is it necessary to have empathy?  A shark lacks empathy but survives just fine.  If a shark doesn't need empathy, why should a human?

We would all kill each other that's why.
It's Okay To Say You're Welcome
     Just let people be themselves.
     Arturo The1  リ壱

Dave

Quote from: Dredge on March 20, 2017, 04:26:13 AM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on March 16, 2017, 01:53:30 PM
Only someone utterly lacking in empathy could be having a hard time with this.
Empathy.  Why is it necessary to have empathy?  A shark lacks empathy but survives just fine.  If a shark doesn't need empathy, why should a human?
Looks like you are having a hard time with this, Dredge.

So, you want all your priests not to give a fuck about their congregations then? Your "everloving" religion would collapse rapidly.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

Pasta Chick

Quote from: Dredge on March 20, 2017, 04:26:13 AM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on March 16, 2017, 01:53:30 PM
Only someone utterly lacking in empathy could be having a hard time with this.
Empathy.  Why is it necessary to have empathy?  A shark lacks empathy but survives just fine.  If a shark doesn't need empathy, why should a human?

Unlike the others, I'm not going to fall for your bullshit trolling ploy of going on tangents and asking completely unrelated questions.

You said there's no way atheists can have any sort of morality without direction from God and ought to running around killing babies or something because it makes no difference.

I said anyone with the slightest inkling of empathy can easily understand why that is not the case.

If this truly does not make sense to you, please seek help. You are a sociopath.

Dragonia

Quote from: Dredge on March 20, 2017, 04:26:13 AM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on March 16, 2017, 01:53:30 PM
Only someone utterly lacking in empathy could be having a hard time with this.
Empathy.  Why is it necessary to have empathy?  A shark lacks empathy but survives just fine.  If a shark doesn't need empathy, why should a human?
Dredge, I assume the point that you are trying to make is that God is where our morals come from. That our codes of human decency must come from somewhere, and that we are different from animals because we alone are created in God's image.
But please understand,  no matter what "should"s you throw at us
QuoteIf a shark doesn't need empathy, why should a human?
QuoteYour God of Nothingness doesn't care about the life of babies or what is moral or immoral, right or wrong, good or evil, so why should you?
the fact remains that we humans, churched or not, DO feel a sense of right and wrong.  We DO feel empathy, along with a thousand other human feelings. This is not a contradiction,  unless you are stuck in a little mind box of religion and God. You will never convince someone about God with this argument because it is horrible and it just makes you look like a crazy asshole, the more you argue that we shouldn't care about murdered babies. I know you're trying to make a point, but it's not working. All you have to do is open your eyes and notice reality.
Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle. ~ Plato (?)

Tank

Quote from: Dredge on March 20, 2017, 04:26:13 AM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on March 16, 2017, 01:53:30 PM
Only someone utterly lacking in empathy could be having a hard time with this.
Empathy.  Why is it necessary to have empathy?  A shark lacks empathy but survives just fine.  If a shark doesn't need empathy, why should a human?
Because sharks are not social creatures.
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

Dave

Even chimps have empathy and a sense of right and wrong - mostly learrned in their family/clan group via observation and life's little lessons (like getting slapped for breaking the rules.)

The important point is that the great apes, including humans, developed the genetic ability to learn those lessons. There is no need for a supernatural influence.

Psychopaths, sociopaths, paedophiles (including some priests) etc either did not inherit that ability or got damaged somehow. The historical evidence for "evil" priests, of all kinds, does nothing for god's reputation. Even dogs hace the ability to develop a kind of empathy, so far as we know they have no knowledge nothing of the supernatural. Tasman devils, honey badgers and wolverines etc did not apparently!
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

Dredge

Quote from: Arturo on March 20, 2017, 04:32:18 AM
Quote from: Dredge on March 20, 2017, 04:26:13 AM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on March 16, 2017, 01:53:30 PM
Only someone utterly lacking in empathy could be having a hard time with this.
Empathy.  Why is it necessary to have empathy?  A shark lacks empathy but survives just fine.  If a shark doesn't need empathy, why should a human?

We would all kill each other that's why.
So what?  What makes you think humans need to exist?
Follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Dredge

Quote from: Gloucester on March 20, 2017, 08:00:28 AM
Quote from: Dredge on March 20, 2017, 04:26:13 AM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on March 16, 2017, 01:53:30 PM
Only someone utterly lacking in empathy could be having a hard time with this.
Empathy.  Why is it necessary to have empathy?  A shark lacks empathy but survives just fine.  If a shark doesn't need empathy, why should a human?
Looks like you are having a hard time with this, Dredge.

So, you want all your priests not to give a fuck about their congregations then? Your "everloving" religion would collapse rapidly.
I'm not talking about Christian morality.  I want to explore the moral implications of the atheist belief that life is purely materialistic, ie, the result of meaningless chance; that this life is all there is to existence; that there is no Creator God or gods.  According to " science", a shark is essentially no different to a human, since they are both just machines fashioned by the blind, meaningless process of evoltion - so empathy is neither good nor bad; it's a scientific ireelevance. If empathy is essential for survival, that is also irrelevant, since humans don't need to exist.
Follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Dredge

Quote from: Tank on March 20, 2017, 01:11:06 PM
Quote from: Dredge on March 20, 2017, 04:26:13 AM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on March 16, 2017, 01:53:30 PM
Only someone utterly lacking in empathy could be having a hard time with this.
Empathy.  Why is it necessary to have empathy?  A shark lacks empathy but survives just fine.  If a shark doesn't need empathy, why should a human?
Because sharks are not social creatures.
Why be social?  Why not be anti-social if you want to?   Ted Bundy, for example, was anti-social, and evidently, he liked being anti-social.  If he was an atheist, he could have used this sort of reasoning:  "Science says life is meaningless and I am nothing more than an accidental machine made up of meaningless atoms.  This life is all there is, so I'm going to do whatever the hell I like before I die (I imagine a lot of career criminals think this way).  I don't care if my actions mean others will suffer greatly - because I just don't care.  And I don't care if history remembers me as psychopathic monster who was responsible for sickening violence and untold pain and misery, because I will be dead and anyone aware of me will be dead one day too.".

When a shark kills a human, we call it "nature", but when a human kills a human, we call it murder and immoral.  But this charge of immorality cannot be defended by the naturalism of science, which underpins the belief system of Western atheism. 
So when an atheist says such-and-such is immoral, they should know that that is just their opinion, based on their emotional response ... and nothing else.  In other words, their "morality" is meaningless and ultimately worthless. 
Follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Dave

Quote from: Dredge on March 21, 2017, 06:13:38 AM
Quote from: Gloucester on March 20, 2017, 08:00:28 AM
Quote from: Dredge on March 20, 2017, 04:26:13 AM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on March 16, 2017, 01:53:30 PM
Only someone utterly lacking in empathy could be having a hard time with this.
Empathy.  Why is it necessary to have empathy?  A shark lacks empathy but survives just fine.  If a shark doesn't need empathy, why should a human?
Looks like you are having a hard time with this, Dredge.

So, you want all your priests not to give a fuck about their congregations then? Your "everloving" religion would collapse rapidly.
I'm not talking about Christian morality.  I want to explore the moral implications of the atheist belief that life is purely materialistic, ie, the result of meaningless chance; that this life is all there is to existence; that there is no Creator God or gods.  According to " science", a shark is essentially no different to a human, since they are both just machines fashioned by the blind, meaningless process of evoltion - so empathy is neither good nor bad; it's a scientific ireelevance. If empathy is essential for survival, that is also irrelevant, since humans don't need to exist.

You ask these questions but cannot accept the answers we offer. That makes your actions pointkess and our responses fruitless.

Just carry on with your vision of things if that satisfies your expectations of life and, hopefully, makes you a worthy member of society. If you were half as empathetic, half as charitable, half as considerate as some atheists that I have met you would be a good person.
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

Dredge

Quote from: Dragonia on March 16, 2017, 02:23:40 PM
Well.... yes. Technically you're correct. Human life has no meaning to the "Universe" because the universe has no consciousness. We humans are the ones who assign meaning to life. 
Assigning meaning to meaninglessness doesn't alter it's meaninglessness.  If a monkey throws paint on a canvas and a human comes along and sees "meaning" in the monkey's "painting", all we have still is a meaningless mess of paint on a piece of canvas.

QuoteYou are assuming that you understand my belief system... I'm pretty sure you don't, because you can't at this point in your life.
But my beliefs about what's good and bad come from a rational consideration of the consequences of my actions. And we all have some kind of internal compass that does this. Most of us are stuck living in community with others, and we can see that we don't want others killing our babies, so we don't kill others' babies, and it seems good to all of us that we should not allow the killing of babies, so we make it a law. It's quite elementary and I always wonder why this needs explanation.
Do you realize that every society has limits, laws, prohibitions and punishments, whether they follow God or not? Christianity, and more broadly, God, is NOT necessary to point us in a "moral" direction. We decide what kind of society we want to live in and then makes laws and punishments appropriately.
I don't "understand" your belief system?  All I need to "understand" about your belief system is the part that says life arose by chance from inanimate matter, there is no spirit world or god(s) and that this life is all there is to existence. 
So having "understood" this much correctly, I can then make certain claims about your morality - regardless of what morality you happen to subscribe to or whatever "rational consideration" you employed to arrive at your morality. 
Anyhow, instead of calling it your belief system, I will call it your "science".

Btw, your "rational considerations" are as subjective and ultimately meaningless as morality itself.  What might seem rational to you may seem irrational to someone else.  Besides, which part of your "science" says someone has to behave according to what is "rational", or fair, or for the good of others? 
There is no reason for a person to even behave according their own rationality and standards of morality (conscience) - many a thief believes it's wrong to steal and many an adulterer believes it's wrong to commit adultery.


QuoteI don't know if I would say that I have "moral superiority" over anyone, including an imaginary God. I do, however, feel disgust and revulsion about certain things, again, stemming from what I think about what I would like done (or not done) to me and what I think is good for society in general.

By criticising the actions of Yahweh you are making a judgement.  You are saying, "According to me, your morality is rubbish."  In other words, your think your morality is superior.  The problem with this attitude is, you cannot prove that your morality is superior, since your morality is based on nothing more than your opinion, and you cannot prove that your opinion is more valid than anyone else's. 

On top of this you can't even tell me why it is immoral to kill babies in the first place.  Saying you find it revolting or anti-social tells me nothing about why it is immoral.

QuoteYou may be interested that our world today is demonstrating that the more atheist a nation becomes, the lower their crime rates are, the lower the teen pregnancy rates are, the happier the people are... the list goes on. Societies are better all-around when you take the Bible Baggage away.
http://www.alternate.org/8-countries-where-atheism-accepted-even-celebrated-instead-demonized
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-secular-life/201410/secular-societies-fare-better-religious-societies
There are many many articles on this, but here are 2. I think it's very telling.
I'll have to look into this.  Even anecdotally, I'm skeptical.  Christianity has done a great deal in terms of curbing uncivilised behaviour (btw, apparently their God, Yahweh, is a monster who thinks nothing of "murdering" babies, so I wonder where all this admirable civilised behaviour comes from). 

Consider how drastically Christianity changed the Vikings, for example, who were vicious and ruthless barbarians.  Wives in India no longer have to burn alive on the funeral pyres of their husbands.  South Sea Islanders are longer head-hunters and cannibals.  The Mayans no longer sacrifice a virgin daily to ensure the sun rises.  The list goes on ...
Back in the 1950's, were there security guards on suburban trains; drug addicts robbing and stealing and dying in the streets, suicide rates sky-high?  One hears stories from old folks about how they would leave their doors unlocked when they went out, or how their children were safe to walk to and from school.
Follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Dredge

Quote from: Gloucester on March 21, 2017, 07:05:58 AM
Quote from: Dredge on March 21, 2017, 06:13:38 AM
Quote from: Gloucester on March 20, 2017, 08:00:28 AM
Quote from: Dredge on March 20, 2017, 04:26:13 AM
Quote from: Pasta Chick on March 16, 2017, 01:53:30 PM
Only someone utterly lacking in empathy could be having a hard time with this.
Empathy.  Why is it necessary to have empathy?  A shark lacks empathy but survives just fine.  If a shark doesn't need empathy, why should a human?
Looks like you are having a hard time with this, Dredge.

So, you want all your priests not to give a fuck about their congregations then? Your "everloving" religion would collapse rapidly.
I'm not talking about Christian morality.  I want to explore the moral implications of the atheist belief that life is purely materialistic, ie, the result of meaningless chance; that this life is all there is to existence; that there is no Creator God or gods.  According to " science", a shark is essentially no different to a human, since they are both just machines fashioned by the blind, meaningless process of evoltion - so empathy is neither good nor bad; it's a scientific ireelevance. If empathy is essential for survival, that is also irrelevant, since humans don't need to exist.

You ask these questions but cannot accept the answers we offer. That makes your actions pointkess and our responses fruitless.

Just carry on with your vision of things if that satisfies your expectations of life and, hopefully, makes you a worthy member of society. If you were half as empathetic, half as charitable, half as considerate as some atheists that I have met you would be a good person.
If I were your Philosophy teacher I would give you 0/10 for this answer.   
Follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Dave

#103
 Well, that would demonstrate just how much out of touch with reality, with life as it is lived, the average philosoohy teacher is!

[I tried quote your last post, Dredge, but kept getting an error message that the message body was empty!  :)  ]
Tomorrow is precious, don't ruin it by fouling up today.
Passed Monday 10th Dec 2018 age 74

Ecurb Noselrub

I want to live because I enjoy life.  I observe the same attitudes in others.  I also find that people are more likely to treat me well if I treat them well.  I want people to treat me well so that I can continue to live as long as possible.  That is a basis for "morality" right there: treat others well so they will treat you well so you can enjoy life longer.