The God Illusion?

[Mish]

I don't see why people can't be taught values separate from religion.

Your argument sucks.

Because Atheism goes deeper than just deny existence of deities. It attacks the meaning of life itself. Like I said before, a moral nihilist would say that all truth values are artificially created and therefore there are no truth values and no morals at all therefore killing someone, for whatever reason, is not inherently right or wrong. Making all of the laws we have today that focus on value of life irrelevant.

Another proponent of Atheism will say that life meaning is also artificially created, where as in reality life has no meaning or purpose. How do you assign meaning and purpose to something that inherently does not posses it? If you want to follow this thread of logic used then you have to follow it all the way.

[misombra]

you have to be religious in prison or you get the crap beat out of you.

[IndiReloaded]

Indi this debate is not about you. I never once told you that you lack self worth. The debate is about Atheism and it's lack of clarification why people should live positive and meaningful lives if many Atheists claim that life itself lacks purpose and meaning.

I am simply using myself as an example, Mish. I suppose I would have to call myself 'atheist' but I do not lack self worth. Nor do I think that life lacks purpose and meaning. This is true of most atheists, I think.

You seem to want to equate Moral Nihilism = atheism. That is just outright wrong.

That doesn't surprise me, majority of the population is made up of Religious people. Atheists make up only a couple of percent of the population.

You didn't understand the post, Mish. My point was atheism in prison is not representative of the general population, that's the whole point. Incidence of religion is significantly higher in US prison population.

Miso's rebuttal made more sense than yours, tho I have no idea if its true. Even if it is true (that one gets beaten if one *isn't* religious) then that just adds to the general argument that religion seems to result in more crime than atheism.

I don't see why people can't be taught values separate from religion.

Exactly. They can, and are. My own household being one example of many. Thank you Fras.

[IndiReloaded]

Because Atheism goes deeper than just deny existence of deities. It attacks the meaning of life itself.

No it doesn't Mish. You are just trying to pull flowers out of your ass now. Show me an atheist that thinks this. All we say is that there is no need to concoct an afterlife to live well NOW.

OV? Gribble? Neo? You all think that life has no meaning?

[Lipp]

42!...............

[Mish]

I am simply using myself as an example, Mish. I suppose I would have to call myself 'atheist' but I do not lack self worth. Nor do I think that life lacks purpose and meaning. This is true of most atheists, I think.

I assume that where ever you get your self worth and life purpose from, it wasn't found in the Atheist teachings. It could actually contradict them making you not a real atheist.

You seem to want to equate Moral Nihilism = atheism. That is just outright wrong.

Why is it wrong? Please give me an example of an Atheist school of thought teaching that life has positive purpose and meaning and justifications for it?

[Lipp]

On a less Douglas Adams'y note though, I personally don't see why we need to have a meaning or purpose in life. Boom, you're alive, go for it.

I'm probably bordering on existentialism then, I guess. They have a label for everything these days.

[Mish]

No it doesn't Mish. You are just trying to pull flowers out of your ass now. Show me an atheist that thinks this. All we say is that there is no need to concoct an afterlife to live well NOW.

Not just a follower, I can give you whole books on the subject Sinnott-Armstrong, 2006b, pp. 32–37 and Russ Shafer-Landau, 2003, pp.8–13

There are academics subscribing to and openly teaching this ideology

Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter (2006b). Moral Skepticisms, Oxford University Press.

Joyce, Richard (2001). The Myth of Morality, Cambridge University Press.

Shafer-Landau, Russ (2003). Whatever Happened to Good and Evil?, Oxford University Press.

van Roojen, Mark (2004). "Moral Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism," The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.).

[IndiReloaded]

Mish, you seem to have missed my post that described Secular Humanism, so I will post some info for you directly. It is a very reasonable model for 'positive living' without the need for invoking fiction. In fact, their logo is the 'Happy Human'
This philosophy is a popular one with many 'atheists'.

[url]http://www.americanhumanist.org/Who_We_Are/About_Humanism/Humanist_Manifesto_III[/url]

Here are their main tenets for those who can't be bothered to visit the site:

Secular humanism describes a world view with the following elements and principles:[2]

* Need to test beliefs – A conviction that dogmas, ideologies and traditions, whether religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each individual and not simply accepted on faith.
* Reason, evidence, scientific method – A commitment to the use of critical reason, factual evidence and scientific methods of inquiry, rather than faith and mysticism, in seeking solutions to human problems and answers to important human questions.
* Fulfillment, growth, creativity – A primary concern with fulfillment, growth and creativity for both the individual and humankind in general.
* Search for truth – A constant search for objective truth, with the understanding that new knowledge and experience constantly alter our imperfect perception of it.
* This life – A concern for this life and a commitment to making it meaningful through better understanding of ourselves, our history, our intellectual and artistic achievements, and the outlooks of those who differ from us.
* Ethics – A search for viable individual, social and political principles of ethical conduct, judging them on their ability to enhance human well-being and individual responsibility.
* Building a better world – A conviction that with reason, an open exchange of ideas, good will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world for ourselves and our children.

[IndiReloaded]

Not just a follower, I can give you whole books on the subject Sinnott-Armstrong, 2006b, pp. 32–37 and Russ Shafer-Landau, 2003, pp.8–13

There are academics subscribing to and openly teaching this ideology

Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter (2006b). Moral Skepticisms, Oxford University Press.

Joyce, Richard (2001). The Myth of Morality, Cambridge University Press.

Shafer-Landau, Russ (2003). Whatever Happened to Good and Evil?, Oxford University Press.

van Roojen, Mark (2004). "Moral Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism," The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edward N. Zalta (ed.).

Wow, could you get any more obscure? LOL. Why don't you visit the site I posted. Perhaps the fact that Einstein (someone you may have heard of), subscribed to SH might be a bit more relevant.

You can *always* find some quacks out there ready to publish a book to make a stink. Just like I could easily post about all the crazy religious fundamentals out there blowing up stuff for Allah.

Your argument is weak, Mish. Most self-proclaimed atheists do not subscribe to nihilism, sorry babe. You are making up BS now, kind of like what Cam described in the other thread.

[IndiReloaded]

Why is it wrong? Please give me an example of an Atheist school of thought teaching that life has positive purpose and meaning and justifications for it?

FWIW, you aren't understanding Neo's point either (which he already told you). But there are no 'Atheist Schools' out there. Its the complete opposite of religion, atheists don't need them b/c they aren't trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes, so indoctrination is unnecessary. Teaching the basics of rational thought, which should be a part of any decent education system, is all that is required. Religious schools derail this natural process, early and deliberately.

[Mish]

But there are no 'Atheist Schools' out there.

You just described one with Secular Humanism

Your argument is weak, Mish.

You are making up BS now

Don't make personal attacks asswipe

[Mish]

This philosophy is a popular one with many 'atheists'.

Do you have evidence like overall percentage of Atheists who subscribe to this ideology compared to others to support that?

Here are their main tenets for those who can't be bothered to visit the site:

Secular humanism describes a world view with the following elements and principles:[2]

* Need to test beliefs – A conviction that dogmas, ideologies and traditions, whether religious, political or social, must be weighed and tested by each individual and not simply accepted on faith.
* Reason, evidence, scientific method – A commitment to the use of critical reason, factual evidence and scientific methods of inquiry, rather than faith and mysticism, in seeking solutions to human problems and answers to important human questions.
* Fulfillment, growth, creativity – A primary concern with fulfillment, growth and creativity for both the individual and humankind in general.
* Search for truth – A constant search for objective truth, with the understanding that new knowledge and experience constantly alter our imperfect perception of it.
* This life – A concern for this life and a commitment to making it meaningful through better understanding of ourselves, our history, our intellectual and artistic achievements, and the outlooks of those who differ from us.
* Ethics – A search for viable individual, social and political principles of ethical conduct, judging them on their ability to enhance human well-being and individual responsibility.
* Building a better world – A conviction that with reason, an open exchange of ideas, good will, and tolerance, progress can be made in building a better world for ourselves and our children.

That was an interesting read, but the real Atheist beliefs are summarized better in statement like:

We are here because one odd group of fishes had a peculiar fin anatomy that could transform into legs for terrestrial creatures; because the earth never froze entirely during an ice age; because a small and tenuous species, arising in Africa a quarter of a million years ago, has managed, so far, to survive by hook and by crook. We may yearn for a ‘higher’ answer—-but none exists. - — Stephen Jay Gould

Even Secular Humanists (the most positive Atheists which are just a small percentage of the Atheist base) don't give life a positive meaning. They just say that there has to be a commitment to find one and that it can be anything. For example, if I say that injecting myself with heroin is a positive life meaning for me, then nothing in Secular Humanist ideology will deny that if that's what I enjoy doing.

Also almost all Atheists subscribe to Nihilistic questionable views on existence of morals because it postulates the existence of a kind of "moral fact" which is nonmaterial and does not appear to be accessible to the scientific method. The positive meaning of life itself is not accessible to the scientific method, so how do you go about defining it or finding it?

[Mish]

On a less Douglas Adams'y note though, I personally don't see why we need to have a meaning or purpose in life. Boom, you're alive, go for it.

That is exactly the problem, with serious far reaching consequences.

[NeoSeminole]

Mishanya says:

"Please give me an example of an Atheist school of thought teaching that life has positive purpose and meaning and justifications for it?"

there is no atheist school of thought. Atheism is no more a philosophical view than not believing in leprechauns. Does a lack of belief in leprechauns mean your life has no purpose or meaning?