Atheism requires as much faith as rel...

Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

There are 258039 comments on the Webbunny tumblelog story from Jul 18, 2009, titled Atheism requires as much faith as religion?. In it, Webbunny tumblelog reports that:

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Webbunny tumblelog.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#149202 Jan 21, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Not necessarily.
<quoted text>
Not necessarily.
<quoted text>
I agree with you that rape is wrong. We agree because we have empathy and don't want people to experience pain.
From this agreement comes laws and systems of morality and ethics.
Honestly, i don't even know what the question was or what the point of the rape discussion is all about but anyway.

We agree coz our heart say's so, coz of my 'God'/ your empathy, not coz of our governments. Governments are not ethical and all that sh*t, they do everything for their own benefit. People who only fear the law and don't have empathy, change when the law changes.

Do u really think that the majority of the people in America have more empathy compared to the people in India/China?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149203 Jan 21, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
I just accounted for it. Morality is an evolved survival mechanism.
<quoted text>
The "godddidit" answer is always easy. Figuring out what morality actually is, and why we have it, was not as easy.
Are you working on the assumption that atheism is a worldview, and that it's my worldview? It's not, and it's not. I'm an atheist, but all that means is that I lack belief in gods. It means nothing else.
<quoted text>
You can't "decide" reality. All individuals capable of making moral distinctions will probably never be identified.
<quoted text>
I would use the definition of morality as the standard. I'm not speaking of a defined moral code, just the definition of what morality is.
<quoted text>
I'm still failing to see it. What do you see? And please, be articulate.
<quoted text>
This was about the greater society and the individual, not consensus. But anyways...
Societies are made up of individuals. Individuals hold moral beliefs. The individual and the greater society influence each other. The individual (mind) holds the beliefs, so the individual is the only "place" where morality can exist. The "final say" will then reside in the individual, but each moral distinction made by a member of society is influenced by that society.
<quoted text>
I didn't say they were equal.
I haven't appealed to any absolute morality.
I know you believe that morality is evolved, but you have not thought that through.

Morality then, is merely that which is expedient to the greater number of individuals.

Expediency then does not supply good or evil, right or wrong, it just supplies itself.

You are confusing the godidit argument (akin to the atheistic arockdidit) with the transcendental argument for Gods existence, two separate arguments.

You also now have placed morality squarely back in the individuals hands.

So now which individual is right morally?

The one with the most votes?

Because if that is your standard, you have a problem.

Hitler gained the most votes, therefore, according to your logic, he was morally right...
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#149204 Jan 21, 2013
Not every question is answered instantly.
godbots need instant gratification.
As do religious child abusers.
mtimber wrote:
But they cannot account for the great "why" questions of life.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#149205 Jan 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
Well said, and it is exactly why it has changed over time.
For instance it was once morally acceptable to own slaves.
We call that progress.

It's not like Christianity hasn't progressed, but a lot of Christians don't seem to understand that. They have to keep redefining "God" to make him better, and reinterpreting the Bible so they don't get sick while reading that filth.

“Jon Snow”

Since: Dec 10

The King in the Nor±h

#149206 Jan 21, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
You have failed to grasp the fundamental flaw in your reasoning...
If society decides that rape is okay, you have to go along with that.
According to your argument.
But as you subject the morality of the individual to society, you are in effect forcing the individual to go against their conscience.
What if the individual is more enlightened than society, should he practice societies morality because he is outnumbered?
Slavery is a perfect example of this very thing you speak.

It was once perfectly acceptable, but the minds shifted that it wasn't. So it became immoral, mind you this shift took hundreds of years to complete. There is no flaw here we can see examples in history, as society's changed so did morality.

Is it moral to burn witches at the stake?
It once was, and they did by moral minded Christians, who believed themselves right. But this unthinkable now, and more than a few steps away from what thought to be moral.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149207 Jan 21, 2013
TheBlackSheep wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no ultimate standard. You thinking that there is, further exposes your ignorance to your own religion and world history.
Which of the ten commandments states that marrying a 10-year-old girl is wrong? None. Why do we not allow 10-year-olds to marry?
Yet your bible god tells his followers to murder every living thing, except for the virgin girls. Those you force into marriage.
Make that verse sound nice! LOL!
You keep contradicting yourself...

In the first sentence you state there is no ultimate standard of morality.

Then in the last sentence you appeal to an ultimate standard of morality when you make your appeals of outrage.

You need to make up your mind, because all you are telling me about atheism at the moment, is that it cannot even supply a consistent rational basis for morality.

You still fail to grasp your own fundamental breakdown in logic.

If there is no ultimate absolute standard of morality, then nothing is absolutely immoral...

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149208 Jan 21, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Not every question is answered instantly.
godbots need instant gratification.
As do religious child abusers.
<quoted text>
Christians like rational answers.

Atheists are happy to have faith.

Is that the point you are trying to make?

:-)

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#149209 Jan 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> Slavery is a perfect example of this very thing you speak.
It was once perfectly acceptable, but the minds shifted that it wasn't. So it became immoral, mind you this shift took hundreds of years to complete. There is no flaw here we can see examples in history, as society's changed so did morality.
Is it moral to burn witches at the stake?
It once was, and they did by moral minded Christians, who believed themselves right. But this unthinkable now, and more than a few steps away from what thought to be moral.
So slavery was not morally wrong when everyone practiced it?

But it is now wrong because society has evolved morally?

So if you were living in the time when slavery was acceptable, would slavery have been immoral?

“Jon Snow”

Since: Dec 10

The King in the Nor±h

#149210 Jan 21, 2013
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>
Honestly, i don't even know what the question was or what the point of the rape discussion is all about but anyway.
We agree coz our heart say's so, coz of my 'God'/ your empathy, not coz of our governments. Governments are not ethical and all that sh*t, they do everything for their own benefit. People who only fear the law and don't have empathy, change when the law changes.
Do u really think that the majority of the people in America have more empathy compared to the people in India/China?
It's about how Christians think morality is a gift from god, when it is a standard we hold ourselves to in reality.
It has nothing to do with god other than for those who believe they receive guidance from religion. But it isn't so , because if anything religion can swing morality to immoral acts against personal thought. I don't personally think that people from anywhere are that much different , despite religion in what we have ultimately decided as moral standard.
The universal declaration of human rights is testament of that.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.sht...

Most all the world agreed on this standard.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#149211 Jan 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Well said, and it is exactly why it has changed over time.
For instance it was once morally acceptable to own slaves.
Morality does not change!!!

That's the problem, most of us humans follow society and not our heart.

It was acceptable to keep slaves then, but i bet u, that the moral individuals didn't keep any slaves.

America threw bombs on Iraq and killed so many innocent children. Stupid people support America's actions, but moral people call America a big bully!

U think throwing bombs on little children is better than keeping slaves? How has society gotten better? It hasn't, evil has just taken on a different form!
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#149212 Jan 21, 2013
Bollocks.
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
Christians like rational answers.
Atheists are happy to have faith.
Is that the point you are trying to make?
:-)

“Jon Snow”

Since: Dec 10

The King in the Nor±h

#149213 Jan 21, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So slavery was not morally wrong when everyone practiced it?
But it is now wrong because society has evolved morally?
So if you were living in the time when slavery was acceptable, would slavery have been immoral?
I cannot say because I wasn't there, but can only say I don't think I would have thought it to be. But In defense of the ignorance of slaveholders, they really thought the slaves were more like animals than humans then. that frame of mind changed, I think when everyone actually discovered that the slaves were just as human and feeling as anyone else. This probably didn't take as long as it did to end the practice, because their was profit involved.
As long as profit is involved there will be greedy men who don't care what feelings get in their way.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#149214 Jan 21, 2013
Yes it does. Moreover, morality predates any modern religion.
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>
Morality does not change!!!

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#149215 Jan 21, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So slavery was not morally wrong when everyone practiced it?
But it is now wrong because society has evolved morally?
So if you were living in the time when slavery was acceptable, would slavery have been immoral?
It was always morally wrong, but an evil society allowed it to happen! Moral people have been fighting against evil since the beginning.

No, because Aura moves with society, he's influenced by society, so if he was in the olden days, he would have kept slaves, too.

LOL, i'm gonna get a telling off from Aura! I love u really, buddy!! I'm just sayin'. Forgive me!!

“cdesign proponentsists”

Since: Jul 09

Pittsburgh, PA

#149216 Jan 21, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
You keep contradicting yourself...
In the first sentence you state there is no ultimate standard of morality.
Then in the last sentence you appeal to an ultimate standard of morality when you make your appeals of outrage.
You need to make up your mind, because all you are telling me about atheism at the moment, is that it cannot even supply a consistent rational basis for morality.
You still fail to grasp your own fundamental breakdown in logic.
If there is no ultimate absolute standard of morality, then nothing is absolutely immoral...
Actually, I think you are finally getting it! Just think a little bit harder and I think we may have a break through!

Let me know when the light bulb shines!

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#149217 Jan 21, 2013
mtimber wrote:
But what happens when in a society more people agree that rape is acceptable?
You don't know?
mtimber wrote:
Which has and does indeed happen.
If that is your standard, then you will of course be duty bound morally, based on your own professed standard, to honour that position of that society.
I'm not duty bound to shit. That must be where you're having trouble understanding me. I make my own rules.
mtimber wrote:
And as to you having empathy.
You are a rock that turned into a man, why does empathy matter?
It gives us a survival advantage as a species.

Personally, empathy influences me to be more tolerant and considerate to others, which makes me feel good, and generally leads to people expressing empathy towards me in return.
mtimber wrote:
Empathy for an atheist is little more than a convenience that can be dropped at any time.
That is true for all people. Disparaging atheists in this way is dishonest.
mtimber wrote:
In fact, it seems that much of mankind has evolved very little empathy if the news is anything to go by.
The news isn't anything to go by.
mtimber wrote:
So how do you account for this seeming lack of empathy in your fellow man?
We do not have equality in the word. That is why empathy is not a higher priority in some people.
mtimber wrote:
You cannot of course.
And this is why your atheistic worldview is totally bankrupt.
It cannot answer the most basic "why" questions that humanity asks...
Atheism only answers one question, "Do you believe in any gods?", with the answer, "No."

I get the feeling that you would like for my worldview to have a name, but it doesn't. It's personal to me.

“Jon Snow”

Since: Dec 10

The King in the Nor±h

#149218 Jan 21, 2013
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>
Morality does not change!!!
That's the problem, most of us humans follow society and not our heart.
It was acceptable to keep slaves then, but i bet u, that the moral individuals didn't keep any slaves.
America threw bombs on Iraq and killed so many innocent children. Stupid people support America's actions, but moral people call America a big bully!
U think throwing bombs on little children is better than keeping slaves? How has society gotten better? It hasn't, evil has just taken on a different form!
I may agree with you and have said so in the past, but morality is not the issue here, it is blocking it out.
Why do you think they would raise such a stink over guns here now killing children?

Because they want to achieve two goals,
1. Block your mind of it.
2. Pull the teeth of resistance to such things.

They will never take our guns, because we are the force and power of the government, and lest they forget that we can take it back.
We may have to remind them.

No they wrong, and wrong again, in this we can both agree.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#149219 Jan 21, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> It's about how Christians think morality is a gift from god, when it is a standard we hold ourselves to in reality.
It has nothing to do with god other than for those who believe they receive guidance from religion. But it isn't so , because if anything religion can swing morality to immoral acts against personal thought. I don't personally think that people from anywhere are that much different , despite religion in what we have ultimately decided as moral standard.
The universal declaration of human rights is testament of that.
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.sht...
Most all the world agreed on this standard.
Morality is the God!

We are all capable of being good, but some of us choose not to be.

Human right's, bulsh*t!

Which country hasn't gone against all these acts?

The truth is morality is scarce, it's a rare thing to find in humans.

How can u not see that all our governments are evil? religious leaders are evil, Our society is evil?

“Jon Snow”

Since: Dec 10

The King in the Nor±h

#149220 Jan 21, 2013
mtimber wrote:
<quoted text>
So slavery was not morally wrong when everyone practiced it?
But it is now wrong because society has evolved morally?
So if you were living in the time when slavery was acceptable, would slavery have been immoral?
They believed it to not be morally wrong to burn witches either. Or be entertained by public hangings. But the morality of people does shift.
Thinking

Leighton Buzzard, UK

#149221 Jan 21, 2013
Slavery was always wrong- but only by applying today's non religious morals.

Religious morality said slavery was OK.

Therefore morality can change, and change for the better.
Clementia wrote:
<quoted text>
It was always morally wrong, but an evil society allowed it to happen! Moral people have been fighting against evil since the beginning.
No, because Aura moves with society, he's influenced by society, so if he was in the olden days, he would have kept slaves, too.
LOL, i'm gonna get a telling off from Aura! I love u really, buddy!! I'm just sayin'. Forgive me!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 2 min One way or another 48,492
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 1 hr scientia potentia... 23,492
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 1 hr Rosa_Winkel 21,866
Athetists' best bet is that there is a God. 2 hr Uncle Sam 7
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) Sat Eagle 12 4,907
Why you need to make sure you are saved before ... Fri Scaritual 14
Jesus Christ and Wisdom, Knowledge, Understandi... Nov 29 Richardfs 5
More from around the web