What exactly is atheism? (offshoot of same sex thread)

[celtic_crippler]

BACON!

Right?

Right.

I knew intelligent discourse was beyond you. Keep trying though... it's the effort that matters. Really. It is. But here's your gold star for trying :s123:

I can say my moral code comes from a natural sense of right and wrong. And a supportive family community.

I don't doubt that you couldn't get benefits from other sources like religion, martial arts, teachings of Buddha and the Dali Lama. But I think it compliments what we all have inside us already.

So you believe we're born with an innate sense of right and wrong? Who or What put that there? Do you attribute that to brain chemistry? Through evolution those most fit for the current environment weren't ruthless schmucks, but rather those with a keen moral compass? Is that right?

Just want to make sure I understand where you're coming from.

An atheist can derive their moral character from reason if they choose. There are plenty of secular ethical systems that lay out fully fleshed out descriptions of right and wrong. Philosophic Libertarianism is a good example of this. If people accept the Non-Aggression principle and Self Ownership, all of the good things described in religion will still be found as good...and all of the evil things that religions call good will be relabeled as evil. It's a delusional upgrade!

Reason? Have you looked around you lately? How many people do you honestly think are capable of reason? I'll have to give you points on having a positive attitude at least LOL

But yes, all spiritual people do not necessarily follow a diety, as with Buddism. But they do have a "source" that supplied them with a "bar" to be strived for, no?

I think you are reading too much into a metaphor. When these physicists refer to "god" they do not mean it in any contemporary religious sense.

Quite the contrary. I'm not so arrogant to presume to think I could wrap my puny human mind around something so significant and profound. If you read my posts you would know that already.

It's a personal view of the universe. If people want to call this spirituality, that's fine by me. I guess that means I'm spiritual then. I have a view of the universe that helps me interpret the bigger picture and and can help alleviate some of the anxieties of human consciousness. That doesn't mean that I'm not an atheist, IMO. I reject religions and am open to new, better, more rational views of the universe and my place in it.

You really haven't bothered to read my posts have you? Respect is a two way street... if you're going to address me specifically at least read what I've posted.

So, why bother to talk about religion at all? how does it matter to me what people believe? People need to be very careful with religion. The thousands of year old delusions were created by humans to manage their minds and enforce violent hierarchies. If society keeps tying itself to these beliefs, they open themselves up to control by any high priest who crooks a finger. Religion has always been a tool of power and an enemy of free humanity.

You're getting warmer...

If people want to call their personal ethos Jesus, that might be okay, but there are backdoors that are built in that concept that clever human managers can use to insert mind control viruses. IMHO it's an outdated operating system that is prime for abuse. I talk about religion for selfish reasons. I talk about it in order to ensure that I can remain free and that my life is free from oppression.

Yup... oppression sucks. I much rather prefer "free will."

 

[crushing]

Right.

I knew intelligent discourse was beyond you. Keep trying though... it's the effort that matters. Really. It is. But here's your gold star for trying :s123:

You weren't flattered by my impersonation? I'm glad you have recognized the "bacon" responses for what they were.

 

[celtic_crippler]

you weren't flattered by my impersonation? I'm glad you have recognized the "bacon" responses for what they were.

bacon!

 

[celtic_crippler]

Initially, this thread brought back fond memories of my "coffee shop days."

While I find pseudo intellectuals and their un-researched theories often entertaining, I'm afraid this thread has become tiresome.

I've become quite comfortable with my beliefs in my "old age". I hope that you too will someday be content with yours.

I wish you all peace. I'm out!

And never...ever... forget... BACON!

 

[jezr74]

Initially, this thread brought back fond memories of my "coffee shop days."

While I find pseudo intellectuals and their un-researched theories often entertaining, I'm afraid this thread has become tiresome.

I've become quite comfortable with my beliefs in my "old age". I hope that you too will someday be content with yours.

I wish you all peace. I'm out!

And never...ever... forget... BACON!

The information is out there, you just can't wake someone who is pretending to be asleep.

Enjoy your beliefs, your only accountable to yourself. Who cares what what anyone else thinks.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[jezr74]

So you believe we're born with an innate sense of right and wrong? Who or What put that there? Do you attribute that to brain chemistry? Through evolution those most fit for the current environment weren't ruthless schmucks, but rather those with a keen moral compass? Is that right?

Just want to make sure I understand where you're coming from

I know your frustrated with this thread, but for what is worth. I think we have an awareness when we are born that is shaped through or life experience. Maybe best described at an early age as instinct? But our environment would shape it I guess. Brought up in a cannibal pygmy tribe, I would have a different view on the value of human life. As opposed to say a loving family, who shelter homeless people until they are able to take care of themselves. Maybe brain chemistry influences how you process it as you are taught or observe.

Along with compassion, hate, humor etc



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[jks9199]

Folks, let's try to keep things civil and friendly, OK? This has stayed civil, despite the fact that it's a topic that's potentially pretty explosive. Let's get back on track...

 

[jezr74]

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[crushing]

Initially, this thread brought back fond memories of my "coffee shop days."

While I find pseudo intellectuals and their un-researched theories often entertaining, I'm afraid this thread has become tiresome.

I've become quite comfortable with my beliefs in my "old age". I hope that you too will someday be content with yours.

I wish you all peace. I'm out!

And never...ever... forget... BACON!

I'll bet those coffee shop philosophers never saw it coming when you smoked them with your brilliant cured pig meat assault against their theories.

 

[jezr74]

The title should be changed to -

What is Atheism to an Atheist? What is Atheism to a Spiritual, Religious or Non-Atheist person?

 

[jezr74]

Here is a great lecture by Professor Brian Cox on the Universe and how it came about. He has a very good way of explaining things to make it easier to understand.

While I don't personally think it is about Atheism, the science behind the universe and nature came up several times. It's about what it is, and is not about disproving anything.

 

[ballen0351]

What's an Atheist symbol?
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/29/us/new-york-911-museum-cross/index.html?c=us&page=2

"We are confident that we will eventually win this case and that cross will be removed, or atheists will be allowed to have our own symbol in there," he said.

 

[Sukerkin]

:lol: God knows ... see what I did there .

I'm guessing if asked we'd see a huge variety of answers to the question. Atheism is not a 'faith' with rules and hierarchy so there can be no one thing to stand for it.

Even just asking me, the answer I would give would probably vary depending on what philosophical or poetic concepts were foremost in my mind at the time. A good one might be the famous drawing of the anatomy of Man:



But I might equally settle for an image of the brain, to illustrate rational thought, or maybe the classical symbology of the structure of the atom to show a seeking for answers beyond what we can see.

 

[ballen0351]

OK I guess I don't get it then. If there is no symbol then what's the point. I also don't get why an atheist would be offened by a cross. If you don't believe then wouldn't it just look like 2 hunks of metal to you? Why would it offend you?

 

[Sukerkin]

For me? It wouldn't.

I saw a very good conversation the other day on Facepalm that put forward the idea that the sort of objectionating {could've sworn that was a made up word :lol:} to things such as the cross in the article is not Atheism. It is Anti-Theism, a rather different thing.

Now, yes, I know I am rather outspoken when religious matters come up on the board and leave no doubt where I stand on the matter of organised religion (I also know I upset some people when I do that and I am sorry but I do feel very strongly about the matter). But I am not Anti-Theist in that I would stop people believing in any mythology they choose. Likewise, I expect those with committed religious beliefs to not try to foist their beliefs on others, especially people like me who, over the course of more than thirty years of thought on the issue has decided that there is no evidence for 'God' (in any form) to be anything more tangible than a social construct of our own making.

That logical conclusion means that, if asked about my religious persuasion, I now answer Atheist rather than Agnostic. But it doesn't 'define' me in any other way than that and it does not mean that I no longer have compassion or understanding for the strength of other peoples beliefs and symbols. The Cross has been the symbol (as have all religious symbols I can think of) carried over the commission of some pretty darned horrible things but the cross in the article was a representation of the faith of some people and an expression of their sorrow (or so I presume). I would no more object to that than I would to someone placing flowers on a grave, like I did for my wife today.

 

[arnisador]

A common atheist symbol is an atom (for science) with an A in it.

 

[jezr74]

Its kinda weird in my opinion to have a blessed cross put in. Just seems out of character by American standards.

Hardly worth a protest though.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[ballen0351]

Its kinda weird in my opinion to have a blessed cross put in. Just seems out of character by American standards.

Hardly worth a protest though.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

If I read it right and I don't know the story so I could be wrong but the workers at ground zero found It in the rubble saved it as a sign of hope. So its being included as part of the "story" of the twin towers.v which is why adding a sign for atheism makes no sense to me it has nothing to do with the story. It would be like wanting to add a symbol to an Egyptian pyramid because your offended by their ancient gods. Its just not part of the story.

 

[jezr74]

If I read it right and I don't know the story so I could be wrong but the workers at ground zero found It in the rubble saved it as a sign of hope. So its being included as part of the "story" of the twin towers.v which is why adding a sign for atheism makes no sense to me it has nothing to do with the story. It would be like wanting to add a symbol to an Egyptian pyramid because your offended by their ancient gods. Its just not part of the story.

Yeah, seems like protesting for the sake of protesting. Not the place to do it of that's the case.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

 

[arnisador]

It's part of the story. It's odd to an atheist that the take-away message from nearly 3000 religious-inspired deaths is "God cares" (in the form of crossed bars), but so be it.