Thread: Will Atheism Save the World?

Nope. The only way I can be right is for everyone else to be wrong.

Originally Posted by Taosaur

Atheists, do you really believe that if everyone thought like you and shared your values, the world would be a better place?

Yes.

Originally Posted by Taosaur

Do you see that ever happening?

Possibly. I'm certain I won't live to see that day, though.

Originally Posted by Taosaur

Do you see any rationally positive outcome to pushing for a world that can never exist?

Yes. Speaking of a world without religion is speaking of an idea outcome. It's impossible, but it is the aim. The idea is that by not saying to ourselves "well, we'll never reach perfection" is that we're still going to reach to get as close to perfection as possible. It's not something you do and be done with. It's a perpetual thing. The only thing you could call pointless is an apathetic and defeated attitude.

Originally Posted by Taosaur

Personally, I think religions have to police themselves for the most part, and fix what's wrong from within. We need to encourage interfaith dialogue, so that people can retain their faith while accepting that there are many paths.

This will not speak to many religious people for the reason that their religions specifically state that theirs is the only path. Further, let's not hold religions responsible for what "religions do". Let's hold people responsible for what people do. Let's hold them responsible for substituting rationality for faith. Let's hold them responsible for substituting questions with obedience. Let's hold them responsible for using "religion" as an excuse to be an idiot; to stop asking questions and to stop reasoning, corroding those very things which have brought us as humans so far. The things we need to survive and advance as a specie and society as a whole.

Whether there is a god or not, there is no room for faith or religion in this world.

Originally Posted by Mark75

This will not speak to many religious people for the reason that their religions specifically state that theirs is the only path....there is no room for faith or religion in this world

Well aren't you the pot calling the kettle intolerant.

Your Christian signature goes well with the thread dear Mark.

As for no faith or religion... I was going to rebut, until i actually thought about it.

eg. You have faith you will be able to wake up tomorrow, proven by you saying see you tomorrow to someone.
Without that...
Without faith what would happen to the world?

Even for the journey I'm on... I haven't been thinking about it, but I've let go of all faith... and I don't think I need it.

Maybe it would be "helpful" to people if they had no faith.
Hope is always in the future which doesn't exist.

Let's save the world dear Mark.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

Well aren't you the pot calling the kettle intolerant.

Please indicate where I stated I was tolerant.

Originally Posted by ClouD

eg. You have faith you will be able to wake up tomorrow, proven by you saying see you tomorrow to someone.
Without that...
Without faith what would happen to the world?

Where I say "faith" I mean strong belief in the absence of reason, or in the presence of contrary reason. Statistically speaking, I've woken up 100% of the times I've gone to sleep so far over my XX years of being alive. I know well the crime rate here is quite low, so the chances of a break in are almost nill. The people I know don't want to kill me, and I have no reason to believe that anyone else does, so I'm covered there. You see where I'm going with this? The truth is that I have a lot of supportive evidence that my chances of waking up tomorrow are actually very, very high. High to the point that in practical terms I can just say 100% because it's so close*. So, no, I don't think there's room for faith in the world. It has no use at all.

*If found dead tomorrow, don't feel bad for laughing. Savour the irony.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Please indicate where I stated I was tolerant.

I never said you did; but you did point to the intolerance of religions as one of their faults. I'm having a hard time telling why you think you are any better.

It seems Mark is too.

That's why he will never lose hope.

I don't tolerate using faith and superstition in the place of rationale. Am I wrong for doing this? Am I wrong for expecting people to think when they should?

No, just wrong for assuming people who hold religious beliefs do not think about what they believe, or that human logic applies to every possible question.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

No, just wrong for assuming people who hold religious beliefs do not think about what they believe, or that human logic applies to every possible question.

I don't feel compelled to respond to this blatant straw man argument. If you would like to cut the BS just get to flinging accusations at me and fill my mouth with words, I would suggest you make a new topic for it.

How exactly is it a 'straw man' argument? Where have a put words in your mouth?

"assuming people who hold religious beliefs do not think about what they believe"

This seems to imply that I said that all people who consider themselves religious never think rationally.

well you did say that you expect people to think when they should, and you also said that you thought the world would be a better place if everyone was athiest. When these two statements are taken as relating to each other it seems as though you are implying that only atheists are capable of thinking. Otherwise, why say it? What was the purpose of the statement otherwise?

Originally Posted by Taosaur

Atheists, do you really believe that if everyone thought like you and shared your values, the world would be a better place?

Originally Posted by Mark75

Yes.

Do you know the purpose of elaboration? In this case it is a good idea to communicate your ideas effectively.

Originally Posted by ClouD

Your Christian signature goes well with the thread dear Mark.

It does, if you take note that the Cross isn't well defined.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Am I wrong for expecting people to think when they should?

Yes, if this implies that they must only think like you.



Faith is put into rational, by the way. Faith is had, and/or put into anything of action which is bound to work constructively, but the rational is actually formed by faith in the first place. Atheists cannot find the greater rational, because of many reasons.

No. I'm saying that only religious people use faith and superstition instead of rationale. I did not say that they ALWAYS do this. I did not say that atheists NEVER do this. I said I oppose this way of not thinking. Actually bother to read what I wrote next time and you might find yourself better equipped to argue against it. But as far as I can see you're just here to throw blanket statements and build straw men, rather than actually say something intelligent.

Should I just make that topic for you now?

Originally Posted by really

Do you know the purpose of elaboration? In this case it is a good idea to communicate your ideas effectively.

Read the rest of my posts.

Originally Posted by really

Yes, if this implies that they must only think like you.

Yes, it does. I don't mind when someone tells me of a better way to think.

Originally Posted by really

Faith is put into rational, by the way. Faith is had, and/or put into anything of action which is bound to work constructively, but the rational is actually formed by faith in the first place. Atheists cannot find the greater rational, because of many reasons.

I do not call anything which is rational "faith". The disparity you find here is in the semantics of your definition.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Actually bother to read what I wrote next time and you might find yourself better equipped to argue against it.

Should I just make that topic for you now?

It seems like some peoples purpose in life is to create situations for argument. Correct for you?

Hello

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

No, just wrong for assuming people who hold religious beliefs do not think about what they believe, or that human logic applies to every possible question.

I would argue that human logic certainly applies to all questions that religion tries to answer... such as the mechanics of human flight, the origin of the universe, ethics etc.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

I never said you did; but you did point to the intolerance of religions as one of their faults. I'm having a hard time telling why you think you are any better.

This has been brought up so many times already. Atheism is not an ideology. It's barely even a philosophical position. Every religious person is an atheist in regards to the gods of another religion. The whole concept is faulty in its premise. Being intolerant of religion is being honest about their intellectal value (0) and asserting that the absence of faith is not faith but reason. Atheism doesn't actually tell you to kill theists.

Originally Posted by Taosaur

Yet atheists, descended mainly from the same ontological foundations, just in opposition rather than affirmation, seem equally imperial, suggesting they've found the One True Path to enlightenment and advancement of society.

This is exactly where I "disagree", if you will. Atheism doesn't come from the same ontological foundations. It's an empty concept. It's like saying that being non-teapottist is philosophically the same as being a teapottist and therefore the whole idea of being non-teapottist is faulty and pushing for a world of sanity is somehow unjustified.

We're not going to get everyone to agree on what's going on here. We're not going to get everyone to agree that it's God's will, that it's evolution, or that it's entirely pointless.

Do you see that ever happening? Do you see any rationally positive outcome to pushing for a world that can never exist?

You're just being anti-progress for no justified reason. You could have said exactly the same about witchcraft (it's always been part of our culture so it's pointless to fight it), or racism, intolerance, you name it. Progress only happens if you do something.

Atheists, do you really believe that if everyone thought like you and shared your values, the world would be a better place?

Yes.

Personally, I think religions have to police themselves for the most part, and fix what's wrong from within.

That would be extremely hard, I believe. The whole point of religion is that it's built like a self-sustaining virus of the mind. It's so well protected from within, unbelievable.

We need to encourage interfaith dialogue, so that people can retain their faith while accepting that there are many paths.

I think that this is the wrong way. As long as you accept faith as an acceptable mode of though, you shouldn't wonder that some people embrace faith just a little more. The whole foundation needs to be erased.

When dealing with nutty conspiracy theorists, UFOlogists or astrologers, nobody ever says "We need to encourage interfaith dialogue". If it's crap, it's crap. That's what I think, at least.

here I was thinking I was the one arguing against blanket statements.

I am a religious person and I never base my beliefs or actions on superstition. I will make a blanket statement about faith however; every single human being makes the majority of their decisions based on faith. When it comes to indepth scientific principles, most people rely solely on faith with no first hand knowledge regarding the principles they take for granted.

Originally Posted by really

It seems like some peoples purpose in life is to create situations for argument. Correct for you?

No, I just want to live in harmony with all the people and the forest spirits. =3

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

I am a religious person and I never base my beliefs or actions on superstition. I will make a blanket statement about faith however; every single human being makes the majority of their decisions based on faith. When it comes to indepth scientific principles, most people rely solely on faith with no first hand knowledge regarding the principles they take for granted.

The difference between religious faith and general belief (as opposed to knowledge) is that the former is unjustified while the later is reasonable.

If you get a death threat on the phone after flushing a Koran on national television, it's reasonable to believe that this is serious and not just a prank call. Yet, this is not safe knowledge.

If some random book says that God exists and 2000 years ago he decided it would be a good idea to bring his son to earth in the Middle East, then that is unjustified and unreasonable.

Simple, not?

Originally Posted by Mark75

Read the rest of my posts.

In future, yeah I guess.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Yes, it does. I don't mind when someone tells me of a better way to think.

So you're going to contradict yourself again?

Originally Posted by Mark75

I do not call anything which is rational "faith".

Neither do I, but faith to me is rational because I understand it. I'm saying that rational has been constructed out of faith. There would be no formula if you had no objects to with with and no belief that a relationship could be built.

Originally Posted by Mark75

No, I just want to live in harmony with all the people and the forest spirits. =3

Fair enough. Just make that more clear next time.

Originally Posted by really

So you're going to contradict yourself again?

Please show me all the times at which I contradicted myself.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Please show me all the times at which I contradicted myself.

The other times are not relevant to my questions, and may simply be misconceptions, so I will only deal with what I am involved with:

Originally Posted by Mark75

Am I wrong for expecting people to think when they should?

Originally Posted by really

Yes, if this implies that they must only think like you.

Originally Posted by Mark75

Yes, it does. I don't mind when someone tells me of a better way to think.

You ask if you are wrong, I give you an outline for the meaning of the statement; you agree, therefore to my definition you're wrong. But your following statement means you do not expect what you originally did, at all.

You say:

Yes, it does: "they must only think like you.", but I don't mind when someone tells me of a better way to think.