Hitchen's Challange

[Daniel Nicholson]

Name an ethical statement made or action performed by a person of faith that could not have been made or performed by a nonbeliever.

Name a wicked statement made or action performed precisely because of religious faith?

 

[Audie]

Name an ethical statement made or action performed by a person of faith that could not have been made or performed by a nonbeliever.

Name a wicked statement made or action performed by a person of faith that could not have been made or performed by a nonbeliever.

Could not or would not

 

[EtuMalku]

Name an ethical statement made or action performed by a person of faith that could not have been made or performed by a nonbeliever.

Name a wicked statement made or action performed by a person of faith that could not have been made or performed by a nonbeliever.

Maybe I don't understand the Challenge correctly but . . .
1) None of the 42 emanations of Maat could be instated unless the person was an adherent of the Egyptian religion. All 42 are ethical statements,
2) A morally wrong action committed by an adherent of any faith in the name of that faith's deity/ruler could not be performed by a non-believer.

However both morality and immorality are subjective experiences and not absolutes, so there needs to be someone or a group who decides what is moral or immoral. Therefore the question is negotiable.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Name an ethical statement made or action performed by a person of faith that could not have been made or performed by a nonbeliever.

Individually anyone can accomplish what anyone else can, but let him show a secular movement which outlasts countries and which can accomplish antiwar objectives. If we left the world in secular hands what would become of it? History has shown us over and over. New gods would arise, as in N. Korea. As in other places. These would then oppress all people until slowly resistance in the form of monotheism began to arise: God, Brahman, Tao, etc.

But I realize there is a weakness in my argument. Didn't monotheism give rise to secular humanism? That it did, both nurturing and protecting it in a world which otherwise would have chewed it up and spit it out.

So what is Hitchens argument? That there may someday be an immortal and virtuous ethical secular humanist in charge? Good luck with that.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Name an ethical statement made or action performed by a person of faith that could not have been made or performed by a nonbeliever.

Name a wicked statement made or action performed by a person of faith that could not have been made or performed by a nonbeliever.

The problem is this: https://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/whatisscience_12
"...
Science doesn't draw conclusions about supernatural explanations
Do gods exist? Do supernatural entities intervene in human affairs? These questions may be important, but science won't help you answer them. Questions that deal with supernatural explanations are, by definition, beyond the realm of nature — and hence, also beyond the realm of what can be studied by science. For many, such questions are matters of personal faith and spirituality."

In other words Hitchen couldn't have decided that challenge, because to him the world is natural and thus all morality is natural. But if there is supernatural morality, he couldn't have known, because to him everything was natural.
The challenge is invalid based on its assumptions on how to solve it.

 

[Audie]

Individually anyone can accomplish what anyone else can, but let him show a secular movement which outlasts countries and which can accomplish antiwar objectives. If we left the world in secular hands what would become of it? History has shown us over and over. New gods would arise, as in N. Korea. As in other places. These would then oppress all people until slowly resistance in the form of monotheism began to arise: God, Brahman, Tao, etc.

But I realize there is a weakness in my argument. Didn't monotheism give rise to secular humanism? That it did, both nurturing and protecting it in a world which otherwise would have chewed it up and spit it out.

So what is Hitchens argument? That there may someday be an immortal and virtuous ethical secular humanist in charge? Good luck with that.

Seems you are saying secularists may declare a holy war, and that some Hitchens thinks a
atheist might turn into a ( real) god?

 

[Brickjectivity]

Seems you are saying secularists may declare a holy war, and that some Hitchens thinks a
atheist might turn into a ( real) god?

What I mean is that secular humanism hasn't got a track record, and there are plenty of examples of countries which tried to oust religion only to enshrine leaders as little gods. For all we know that could be how Egypt got its first pharoah.

 

[Audie]

What I mean is that secular humanism hasn't got a track record, and there are plenty of examples of countries which tried to oust religion only to enshrine leaders as little gods. For all we know that could be how Egypt got its first pharoah.

Dunno when " secular humanism" started. Or where it applies.
But i think extremely limited.
Hence, as you say, has no track record.

Religions, of the middle eastern sky god variety
have an atrocious record So do / did some or most others. All? Exceptions are welcome.

The switch from whatever religion to Kim-god worship has zero to do with secular humanism.

For clarity, you did not actually mean any of the things i asked about?

 

[Nakosis]

Could not or would not

Yes, one would have to prove an atheist would never do such a thing while they could simple do such a thing to prove otherwise.
Kind of disappointing he didn't come up with something better, or maybe it was a statement just meant to troll the theists.

 

[Audie]

Yes, one would have to prove an atheist would never do such a thing while they could simple do such a thing to prove otherwise.
Kind of disappointing he didn't come up with something better, or maybe it was a statement just meant to troll the theists.

Maybe we can just save words with a acronyms for those common thread types.
TTT for " trash theistbthreadz"
TAT for " trash atheist thread"?

 

[PureX]

I'm not going to call Hitchens an idiot, because he wasn't. But It's important to understand that he was being paid by the word. All these proselytizers of 'new atheism' are. So it behooves them to keep spouting off more and more of them.

I'm just sayin'.

 

[Nakosis]

I'm not going to call Hitchens an idiot, because he wasn't. But It's important to understand that he was being paid by the word. All these proselytizers of 'new atheism' are. So it behooves them to keep spouting off more and more of them.

I'm just sayin'.

Yes, but still, not knowing the context in which it was said, I can almost see this being said as a joke.

 

[Left Coast]

Maybe I don't understand the Challenge correctly but . . .
1) None of the 42 emanations of Maat could be instated unless the person was an adherent of the Egyptian religion. All 42 are ethical statements,

Are these the ones?

1. I honor virtue
2. I benefit with gratitude
3. I am peaceful
4. I respect the property of others
5. I affirm that all life is sacred
6. I give offerings that are genuine
7. I live in truth
8. I regard all altars with respect
9. I speak with sincerity
10. I consume only my fair share
11. I offer words of good intent
12. I relate in peace
13. I honor animals with reverence
14. I can be trusted
15. I care for the earth
16. I keep my own council
17. I speak positively of others
18. I remain in balance with my emotions
19. I am trustful in my relationships
20. I hold purity in high esteem
21. I spread joy
22. I do the best I can
23. I communicate with compassion
24. I listen to opposing opinions
25. I create harmony
26. I invoke laughter
27. I am open to love in various forms
28. I am forgiving
29. I am kind
30. I act respectfully
31. I am accepting
32. I follow my inner guidance
33. I converse with awareness
34. I do good
35. I give blessings
36. I keep the waters pure
37. I speak with good intent
38. I praise the Goddess and the God
39. I am humble
40. I achieve with integrity
41. I advance through my own abilities
42. I embrace the All

Many of these could be affirmed as virtues or performed as actions by a nonbeliever.

 

[John D. Brey]

Name an ethical statement made or action performed by a person of faith that could not have been made or performed by a nonbeliever.

That seems too abstract; too open-ended.

For instance, Jesus said, and we can probably believe he believed it, that to enter into eternal life, a person would have to eat his flesh, and drink his blood (John 6:53).

A non-believer could say something like that to be flippant, or un-serious. But do you have faith that a non-believer could, or would, make such a statement being as serious as a heart attack?



John

 

[1213]

Name an ethical statement made or action performed by a person of faith that could not have been made or performed by a nonbeliever....

I think this leads to interesting question: is the action same, if it is done with bad will with action that is done by good will?

 

[Audie]

Are these the ones?

1. I honor virtue
2. I benefit with gratitude
3. I am peaceful
4. I respect the property of others
5. I affirm that all life is sacred
6. I give offerings that are genuine
7. I live in truth
8. I regard all altars with respect
9. I speak with sincerity
10. I consume only my fair share
11. I offer words of good intent
12. I relate in peace
13. I honor animals with reverence
14. I can be trusted
15. I care for the earth
16. I keep my own council
17. I speak positively of others
18. I remain in balance with my emotions
19. I am trustful in my relationships
20. I hold purity in high esteem
21. I spread joy
22. I do the best I can
23. I communicate with compassion
24. I listen to opposing opinions
25. I create harmony
26. I invoke laughter
27. I am open to love in various forms
28. I am forgiving
29. I am kind
30. I act respectfully
31. I am accepting
32. I follow my inner guidance
33. I converse with awareness
34. I do good
35. I give blessings
36. I keep the waters pure
37. I speak with good intent
38. I praise the Goddess and the God
39. I am humble
40. I achieve with integrity
41. I advance through my own abilities
42. I embrace the All

Many of these could be affirmed as virtues or performed as actions by a nonbeliever.

Those are the values we are raised with.
No religion involved.

 

[Audie]

I think this leads to interesting question: is the action same, if it is done with bad will with action that is done by good will?

So like atheists act in bad faith.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Those are the values we are raised with.
No religion involved.

Well, maybe not #38 and #42.

 

[Audie]

I'm not going to call Hitchens an idiot, because he wasn't. But It's important to understand that he was being paid by the word. All these proselytizers of 'new atheism' are. So it behooves them to keep spouting off more and more of them.

I'm just sayin'.

Another TTA ( trash the atheists) post?

The preachers, in stark contrast, no matter how big the megatemple, are pure of heart n motives, and no lectures, books, etc are done
for " by the word" profit, we wonder.

Any ideas which is more profitable, talkin'
atheism or preachin'?

 

[lukethethird]

I'm not going to call Hitchens an idiot, because he wasn't. But It's important to understand that he was being paid by the word. All these proselytizers of 'new atheism' are. So it behooves them to keep spouting off more and more of them.

I'm just sayin'.

I don't see any preachers refusing to pass the collection plate around. Just sayin'