@spendius,
spendius wrote:
I don't quite buy that FBM.
But it is the foundation of your recent arguments.
Quote:I think not knowing everything opens the door to speculation, persuasion and power. And human society needs power structures in order to get organised.
Maybe, maybe not. But it's a
non sequitur to what I said. It's red herring, and I don't have a taste for them.
Quote:That cynical and unscrupulous operators have in the past used various theologies for their own ends is really neither here nor there today.
It's still going on today just as strongly as in the past. Teabaggers, etc.
Quote:The way I see it is that the very fact of self-consciousness and the resulting introspection results in some sort of belief in transcendence and the evolution of explanations of its nature is to be expected and that the explanations will be selected as they contribute to improving the human lot.
Except for the obvious evidence before you of the increasing number of people for whom self-consciousness does not result in any belief in transcendence. It's not necessary. It contributed to improving the human lot by providing them comfort in the face of ignorance of how nature works. Now we have a lot of understanding of how nature works, and beliefs in transcendence, supernatural entities and such ignorance-based superstitions are obsolete and anachronistic. Now they're hindering progress, because they profit by keeping people in the dark and encouraging wilfull ignorance of basic, demonstrable facts about how the universe began, evolved and exists today. They even eschew demonstrability, because there is nothing whatsoever demonstrable about heaven, hell, an afterlife, the human soul, an invisible, omniscient sky-daddy, miracles, etc, etc. That's why (blind) faith is central to the theist position. No evidence, but believe anyway, because the guy in the funny hat is important and knows better than you.
Quote:I don't see how self-consciousness and introspection resulting in a finality of nothingness serves any useful purpose. I think people who think otherwise are just being precious stemming from a desire to be different and superior from the common run, a delight in knocking established institutions and a need to set aside certain teachings of those institutions particularly those regarding sexual activity.
Not that this has anything whatsoever to do with my point about "We don't know everything. Therefore, God", but nihilism isn't the position of every atheist. You can generalize and stereotype as much as you like about atheists being prima donnas or whatnot, but that does nothing whatsoever to address the question of whether or not an invisible, omniscient, omnipotent sky-fairy exists and runs everything.
Quote:They are given away by having no idea what to do in the world they are promoting. They don't know where to start.
To the contrary. They start with demonstrable, repeatable evidence, then build on that by necessary inference. Theists start with daydreams of immortality of the soul, eternal salvation and bliss, and build on that by refining their daydreams to make them more appealing to the gullible.
Quote:Nobody can criticise atheism.
Eh? Anybody can.
Quote:It is only the promotion of it I object to.
That's the way it works. You promote your fave ideas and object to others promoting contrary ideas, and vice versa. That's not even restricted to religion. Politics, sports, economics, etc, etc...
Quote:Scoffing at Congress is one thing but replacing it is on a whole other level.
I can't even begin to guess at what this has to do with "We don't know everything. Therefore, God."
