The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > No god doesn’t mean life is dull, monotonous or pointless > Comments

No god doesn’t mean life is dull, monotonous or pointless : Comments

By Jake Farr-Wharton, published 4/11/2011

A naturalistic interpretation of the universe is both valid and far from depressing.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 14
  9. 15
  10. 16
  11. All
she'll be jake..quote..
""to many theists,..is a terrifying proposition.""

nopt really..i would be comforted
if one of you clever a-thiest..guys would give some definitive proof
that god dont egsist..it would greatly free me to clear out some of those i now am forced to love..because thats what god want's/expects[me/us to love][expects us..to show grace mercy..charety kindness etc]

but if god dont egsist
well heck we could simply pull a few corrupt weeds

so i will read your rave with great care

''The Natural Nature of Nature''

got that right
its not the science of nature..cause science dont claim 'nature'..nor natural nor nurture[only scientific observer staus..

that generates theories and hypothesis
but little 'faulsifyable fact,..especially regarding the process you call wevolution..[as in macro evolution..that lol..evolves a bacteria from a virus..or a fish into a cow]

SHOW me the first
warmblood mammal/coldblood fish
[ie that gap between fish..[coldblood fins scales]
and warm blood fur mammal with legs/hips shoulderblades

how dare you claim to explain..""The argument from design""

IF YOU GOT FACTS of science proof
PRESENT THEM

name the first 'life'
name the efolution it evolved into

JUST GIVE TWO NAMES
and present their micro dna change
that might validate macro evolution..into new genus

""all you need to do is look at the human hand""

thats right..show me sciences best 'hand'
it is very poor compared to the two hands god made for you
[each with their own fingerprint..own dna]

SCIENCES attempts to make a hand
cant even come close

while werre at it..make some life..by science method
[use your own cell..dont just scoop the dna from a living bacteria

and insert a psssweak twenty basepair..strand of lab made dna..
and decieve imbisiles..you made life...[lol]

heck just try to make a cell membrane
you cant..[live with it]

you got a theory
not a science
Posted by one under god, Sunday, 6 November 2011 9:20:44 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The author is well intended but unfortunately reinforces the "cold and mechanical" stereotype of us atheists.

We need to distinguish between beliefs and values. Atheists are very good about beliefs: reason and science reign supreme, hip hip hooray. But alas, atheists are largely mute about the subject of values.

And when believers throw out the "cold and mechanical" nihilist charge, it is the lack of values they are talking about.

Roving off onto a tangent about the wonderment of scientific discoveries is hardly going to make a case that us atheists have developed a compelling value system to rival religion, or that the humanist movement has matured into rearing communities around such values.

No, the wonderment of science doesn't answer the question of where atheists get their values from, nor which package/philosophy of values we ought to promote.

And the reason atheists rarely talk about values is, ironically, that there is only one place atheists can get their values from without a god: that place is emotion/feelings. (cue the dramatic music).

And we all know if you talk to an atheist about emotions they'll likely scurry off to the nearest nerd convention. They are rendered mute when a question cannot be answered by reason and science.

Cue David Hume: "Reason is... the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them".

Cue Bertrand Russell: "All human activity is prompted by desire... If you wish to know what men will do, you must know ... the whole system of their desires with their relative strengths."

Dang! Everything old is new again.

So there you go. If atheists want to dispel the "cold and mechanical" stereotype then we have to develop a philosophy of desire. Wonderment is nice, but it doesn't really address the question.

So that's the challenge for the next generation of atheist/humanist leaders: to articulate a value system in the language of desire. No small task...
Posted by mralstoner, Sunday, 6 November 2011 10:02:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I disagree, mralstoner.

>>So that's the challenge for the next generation of atheist/humanist leaders: to articulate a value system in the language of desire.<<

You make the mistake that so many theists make, which is to assume that atheism is just an alternative form of religion, that needs "leaders" in the same way that religion does. Further, that it is the responsibility of those leaders to "articulate a value system".

Atheists are united under only one banner: we don't accept that there is this thing called "God", who, in various different guises in the many different religions that exist, provides mankind with an alternative father figure.

Apart from that, we either accept or reject the social and ethical norms in exactly the same way that Christians - or members of any other sect, come to that - either do or do not "sin". Fortunately for the world and its harmony, we choose good over evil in pretty much the same proportions as religious folk... with one small exception: we don't tend to go to war in the name of atheism, while history is littered with conflicts that only began because two sets of religious folk disagreed.

If ever there appeared an atheist "leader", I, for one, would refuse to follow him on principal. The image of a whole lot of people accepting the leadership of one individual's "value system" smacks to me of another religion in the making.
Posted by Pericles, Monday, 7 November 2011 7:55:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles, your neutrality is a facade. None of us can be neutral.

All atheists are human, all humans have a value system, therefore all atheists have a value system.

Your value system is something like liberalism, anti-authoritarian, fear of cults, live and let live, etc.

That's OK, that's your choice. But I think that's no way to build a community that I would want to live in. It's risky business leaving a vacuum of leadership and values.

If you don't spoon feed the folks with the values that you want propagated, well, history shows that some other fool will lead them astray.

Humanism needs structure, content, community, leaders, memes, ideas that survive generations.

You have a fear of value systems, cults, and leaders for some reason. It may make you feel good but it won't build any lasting humanist movement. Humanism, of a kind we'd want to live in, will die if it doesn't mature and solidify.

You are a member of the cult of liberal humanism: a dangerously vacuous cult, if you ask me. I don't deny your right to advocate liberalism, but I will surely point out the dangers of it.

You are probably the kind of person who thinks any semblance of groupthink inevitably leads to stifling repression. I think we're both well aware of the dangers of groupthink. The question is: are you aware of the dangers of no groupthink? Apparently not.
Posted by mralstoner, Monday, 7 November 2011 10:12:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pericles said: "The image of a whole lot of people accepting the leadership of one individual's "value system" smacks to me of another religion in the making."

You smacked yourself for no reason. I never said the humanist movement had to be autocratic. Humanism should be a contested movement, equipped with knowledge of human nature, and empowered by free speech. The philosophy/values that resonate the most with people will then rise to the top. This is how to build a democratic humanism that is truly representative of human values.
Posted by mralstoner, Monday, 7 November 2011 10:22:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
o0hh dear..wrre getting into a'thiest's
and thiests topic...oh well..next we get to evolution
so here

lets save some time

we coverd these topic many times
from many aspects

athiest's
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4698&page=0
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4683&page=0

spitual athiesm
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12050&page=0

species
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4591&page=0
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4225&page=0
religeon/evolution

evolution
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11112&page=0
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4568&page=0
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4556&page=0
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4579&page=0

morality
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11163&page=0

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11008&page=0

so i started my own topic
asking evolutionists only please
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3124&page=0

which has many more links
it continued at
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2411&page=0

but lets look at your proof

tezzra
name the first life
name what it evolved into

give me the proof
for even one evolution..*OUT of genus
into a new genus..name names or admit

you got faith in the THEORY
of evolution..not proof

ie you got not one proof..for your faith in science
thus have only exchanged one belief SYSTEM..with an other
or else you would present it..[name names mate..]

the same science peers..that sold us on evolutions THEORY
are trying to sell us a new global tax..[for speculaters to set a market price on]

[ie to get a new tradable commodity...
from thin air]..nice cash flow if you can fool the people again

it barely needs rementioning
but that fanmouse case on evolution..didnt find against creation

if found science class wasnt the place to teach religeon
nothing more nothing less..[then the spin machine went to work

just like its doing now with change[not degfinitive cooling or warming]

lest we forget that huge cfc hole in the ozone layer
that said warming..!..[so is cfc warming..or c02]

thing is cfc means
we cant speculate up the carbon permits

its all froth and bubble folks
make you feel good ol fashend guilt

while stealing you blind...
and INCREASING your c02 consumption
re-building our power services..with expensive quick fixes..
that wont out-last their repayment of the loans[at intrest]..

to 'fix a lie'
sold to the fooled by science
materialists..doing busines as usual

consume
we will even subsidise your con-sumption
then you can feel more clever than the denia-list

smug became a drug
Posted by one under god, Monday, 7 November 2011 11:22:24 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 14
  9. 15
  10. 16
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy