Atheist, Politics and God

a reply to: WakeUpBeer

Cheers I know all about hanuman but I sure will check out the howler monkey gods.
Cheers

a reply to: boymonkey74

Yeah, I really liked him in the Mahabharata.

Cheers!

It's funny how polemic threads often comes from newly registered members...

Historically, any political or state atheism has led to the death of millions. Neither atheism nor theism have any place in ethics. Both have failed in that regard.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope
What would an argument attributing their actions springing from atheism itself look like?

originally posted by: boymonkey74

You talk logic while bleating about religion and god?.

faith is highly logical when applied to the human condition.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

oh lord JESUS!

we're really starting at the bottom here aren't we...

How does science determine who lives or dies? (murder trail/terminally ill patient)

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: ketsuko

I see so all morals are subjective which means nothing is ever truly wrong.

One isn't exclusive to the other. If someone thinks something is truly wrong, then it IS truly wrong for them. Another may have no qualms at all doing the same thing. For example, someone may choose to "conscientiously object" to military service because they feel it's wrong to kill an enemy, while another may not feel it's wrong at all, and is willing, ready and able to actually do it.

this brings me back around to the "individual" then onto groups/cultures/nations

only a groups individual reality is objective.

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: AinElohim

I'm down for a debate!

You just haven't tackled any of my posts really.

Which is fine. I don't really need the debate.

no game sir/ma'am

I only debate in the Socratic method, when I see someone here educated enough in philosophy I will oblige.

originally posted by: AinElohim
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

oh lord JESUS!

we're really starting at the bottom here aren't we...

How does science determine who lives or dies? (murder trail/terminally ill patient)

Science is a tool/method for exploring and discovering the world around us.

So, can anyone show/explain how not being a theist leads to mass murder?

And why haven't secular countries like Norway and japan committed such actions? Why are 'atheist' countries less violent than religious counties?

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer

originally posted by: AinElohim
compose yourself please... show some of those morals that the atheists are superior in.

I am curious to IQ levels now, I think everyone should have a rating in their bio or displayed under their profile image.

That way we will all know who is fit to rule, and who is even worth talking to.

boymonkey isn't an atheist. You must've missed the part of his first post where he said he believed in a God. What were you saying about IQ?

they who do not follow me are evil atheistic scum trying to kill me!

answer the question...?



this will help, it is the basis of the scientific method.

a reply to: AinElohim

If you are only planning to engage with others using the Socratic Method you are going to be a lonely poster here.


It s great in principle and I use it at times but it isn't very practical for message boards to try to dictate how conversations must progress.

Good luck, you will need it.

a reply to: Grimpachi

lonely among all the scientific minded people?

...it is the best way to communicate in this section where differing opinions on objectivism abound.

did I miss the philosophy section of the forum? I best go back to the forum list...

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: AinElohim

If you are only planning to engage with others using the Socratic Method you are going to be a lonely poster here.


It s great in principle and I use it at times but it isn't very practical for message boards to try to dictate how conversations must progress.

Good luck, you will need it.

the question is simple... how does science determine who lives or dies?

this is "moral" inquiry/questioning and "ethical" answering, 8th grade class room 101 stuff.

this is in no way dictating anything unless one already knows they lost the debate from the initial question.

here is another question, we can use the Socratic method...

why will I be lonely among aspiring scientists who don't realize theology is philosophy and not zoology?

a reply to: AinElohim

...it is the best way to communicate in this section where differing opinions on objectivism abound.

You forgot to add "in my opinion".

did I miss the philosophy section of the forum?

Yup.

Here you go. Go get em and have fun.

philosophy and metaphysics

a reply to: Grimpachi

the claim has been made by an academic...

Science can answer moral questions

this is very interesting stuff! theological type of stuff...

---

cool! thanks man... I just missed that again looking thorough the list.

still the claim is a "dictatorship" -- "science can answer moral questions" (not may or might be able to)

it is in this section now so I ask a question back (socratic style)

how can science determine who lives or dies?

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

I imagine the same way it does for theism: a history book. Commit atrocities against those who do not believe the same way. Make the people worship the state, or worse, a grand leader. Like I said, take the worst aspects of religion and run with it.

do you not accept this history?

a reply to: AinElohim

Yeah it is a good Ted Talk you should watch it instead of asking people to explain what it says.

If you watch it and do not understand a part of what is being said then you should ask some questions but you are not doing that.

a reply to: Grimpachi

oh I watched it...

but have you seen I Robot with Will Smith?

---

in I robot there is a car crash at the beginning, two cars go in the water, one car has a child in it and the other car has will smith.

a robot assistant makes the determination to save will smith because his car is closer to the robot assistant.

there is an ethical and moral dilemma here, will smith would have rather the child be saved but the robot allows the child to die.

so I ask again...

how can science help us here?