Atheists... Your life is pointless

@spendius,

BUT ELVES CAN MAKE REALLY FINE COOKIES AND A GOD CANT

@spendius,

BUT ELVES CAN MAKE REALLY FINE COOKIES AND A GOD CANT

0 Replies

@spendius,

So a nonsense belief if is might be useful in controlling the behaviors of members of society is somehow less absurd then others nonsense believes?

Strange how the countries of Europe that had far less true believers then others does not seems any more overrun by "sin" or anti social behaviors then the more religion nations.

So first no fantasy can be defend on the grounds it may be useful if the dumber members of social give it credit and second there seems little proof that religion belief systems are any thing but a drag on the rational developments of societies that in history had in fact cause great harms.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

Do you not think that the word "rational" applied to "the development of societies" is an anthropomorphism ? Sociological mechanisms may not follow the "logic" of psychological or biological mechanisms....indeed they may operate to modify them. For example, homo sapiens having the cognitive apparatus of picturing "consequences", needed to control its animal sexuality and aggression, hence "religion" as a method of parochial societal control, and a psychological palliative promising "eternal life" (with more "satisfaction" in the next life perhaps !) Any "irrationality" is I think is related to the sociopathic aspects of religion operating between societal groups rather than within them, but this perniciousness is a natural phenomenon from an evolutionary point of view at the level of competing societal units, in which tribalism has been cognitively fortified by common beliefs and rituals allegedly originating from a "divine authority".

2 Replies

@fresco,

In relationship to religions now that our knowledge can give us an understanding of the universe without a need for a god that throw lightening bolts around or control the storms on the oceans, I see little or no benefits on dragging the nonsense of religions believes around that was design to give us an understanding of the universe where science serve far better.

We are not communicating around the planet on a computer network by praying to a god after all.

Next we are pack animals with the controls needed to live in packs build into our very makeup.

Religion claimed to function to give some supports to control our behaviors but the modern countries with few true believers seems to function just fine without such 'controls'.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

That "logic" is certainly valid for you and me, but I think you over-estimate the ability of "the masses" to understand what we call "science", or escape from their societal conditioning. And in any case, remember that the bottom line for deists is that all "knowledge" or "intelligence" is in "the gift of God". As an atheist, I recognize that "logical opposition" to theism is futile. For me, the strength of the atheistic position lies with its concern that in recent times weapons of mass destruction can (and have) fallen into the hands of religious fanatics, for whom "religious moderates" give succour without jurisdiction. Not only is this "a strength", but it may be considered to confer on the atheist a moral obligation to stand up and be counted. (And therein lies one answer to "the point of an atheist's life". )

2 Replies

@fresco,

I am trouble by the idea of looking down on the masses and assuming they are condemn never to be free of one form or another of religion dogma that date back thousands of years and were form in cultures that no longer exist.

Once more there are many modern western nations where religion believes seems to be dying out.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

BUT ELVES CAN MAKE REALLY FINE COOKIES AND A GOD CANT

Goddesses can. And not just fine ones. Divine ones. Science can't touch them if the mass produced cookies are anything to go by.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

So a nonsense belief if is might be useful in controlling the behaviors of members of society is somehow less absurd then others nonsense believes?

I implied no such thing Bill. Any nonsense belief will do if it successfully controls, or ameliorates, sexual licentiousness. If it passes the utility test.

Elves are too numerous though. We would soon get to 40,000 elves as the Pagans are said to have done. Big Chief Elf is okay though surrounded by Saint Elves and choirs of angelic elves in celestial bliss. Nothing works for long without a clearly defined hierarchy. Neither Brave New World, 1984 or Star Trek copped out on that like you lot do.

Even rocks have done the job. Sacred animals of all sorts. The Venus fly-trap is one possibility.

By ameliorates I mean different degrees of regulatory control. Which go from, say, a raised eyebrow to a beheading after 200 lashes.

Quote:

Strange how the countries of Europe that had far less true believers then others does not seems any more overrun by "sin" or anti social behaviors then the more religion nation

Never heard of the historical pseudomorphosis have you Bill?

Quote:

So first no fantasy can be defend on the grounds it may be useful if the dumber members of social give it credit and second there seems little proof that religion belief systems are any thing but a drag on the rational developments of societies that in history had in fact cause great harms.

That is simply foam from the mouth. The whole case is shown to be prejudged by the use of "dumber" "drag", your meaning of "rational" and "great harms". You couldn't defend any of those conceptions in a tough debate. Not a one. So you must have assumed that this is a soft debate. Or expect it to be.

Change the soothing word "useful" to "vital" and see where you get. One wouldn't say electricity distribution is "useful" when it's obviously vital. Not for the species. For civilisation.

You use "may be useful" as if you're talking about a toothpick. We are not discussing something that "may be useful". The argument is whether belief is vital or not. Saying that the Christian belief is not vital is like a pheasant saying that its feather colours are not vital.

0 Replies

@fresco,

Quote:

For me, the strength of the atheistic position lies with its concern that in recent times weapons of mass destruction can (and have) fallen into the hands of religious fanatics,

But science made those weapons and there came a point at which it knew there was a choice to be made about them. What actual uses of WMDs do you know of and were they deployed by religious fanatics?

If you can't, or won't. answer the question you should know that there are some people judge your sentence in the light of that.

1 Reply

@fresco,

Quote:

Do you not think that the word "rational" applied to "the development of societies" is an anthropomorphism ? Sociological mechanisms may not follow the "logic" of psychological or biological mechanisms....indeed they may operate to modify them. For example, homo sapiens having the cognitive apparatus of picturing "consequences", needed to control its animal sexuality and aggression, hence "religion" as a method of parochial societal control, and a psychological palliative promising "eternal life" (with more "satisfaction" in the next life perhaps !) Any "irrationality" is I think is related to the sociopathic aspects of religion operating between societal groups rather than within them, but this perniciousness is a natural phenomenon from an evolutionary point of view at the level of competing societal units, in which tribalism has been cognitively fortified by common beliefs and rituals allegedly originating from a "divine authority".

My apologies to Paul Krugman, but I suspect he would say that this runaway paragraph of yours, Fresco, is the way dumb people think smart people write.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

And if you are thinking about replying to this by saying "This is the way smart people think dumb people write...and they are correct"...don't bother. Here...I've already said it for you.

0 Replies

Sounds like somebody has an IQ inferiority complex.

1 Reply

@FBM,

It might be better if you commented on fresco's post before jumping to such a conclusion FB.

I thought it an example of how snotty-nosed, nerdy, refined snobs talk to try to get others to imagine they are not snotty-nosed, nerdy, refined snobs strangling the language to evade rebuttals.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Apisa started with the IQ-measuring rhetoric, seems.

1 Reply

@FBM,

I did not talk about IQ.

I merely pointed out that Fresco's convoluted phraseology is the way dumb people think smart people write. I acknowledged, after a fashion, that I borrowed the line from Paul Krugman.

I do not consider myself to be especially bright...but when testing was in vogue (it doesn't seem to be much any more) I always scored above the 90th percentile in damn near every category in which I was tested.

Not sure why it sounded like IQ envy to you, FBM, but I suspect that is the way a not especially brave person thinks a smarmy comment ought to be made.

1 Reply

@spendius,

I think the 300o deaths of 9/11 qualifies as "mass destruction", and no doubt theocracies have arsenals of biological and chemical weapons with aspirations for nuclear ones. The fact that they have not yet been deployed (discounting Iraq's poison gas usage) is not particularly encouraging.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Seems like you're stuck in a self-feeding, one-upsmanship cycle with regards to intelligence. That's all. I could be wrong. Just the way I'm reading it so far. Reminds me of adolescent concerns. Comparing, compensating, displaying, challenging, evading, obfuscating, all to demonstrate superiority. Why would an adult be so compelled to spend so much energy to do that?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

The price homo sapiens pays for its anticipatory cognition is "fear the void/meaningless existence". Religion is never going to go away as the palliative solution to that. Add to that our apparently innate tendency to tribalism which we share with other primates and we should see why "the brotherhood of man" is merely an advertising slogan.

1 Reply

@FBM,

Quote:

Seems like you're stuck in a self-feeding, one-upsmanship cycle with regards to intelligence. That's all. I could be wrong. Just the way I'm reading it so far. Reminds me of adolescent concerns. Comparing, compensating, displaying, challenging, evading, obfuscating, all to demonstrate superiority. Why would an adult be so compelled to spend so much energy to do that?

I do not think I am doing that at all, but I do think you are. So you might ask yourself that question, FBM.

1 Reply

Atheists... Your life is pointless

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know