The new Athiest Humanities downfall?

[Nimos]

You can't do morality and ethics based only on evidence/truth, rationalism and epistemological realism.
My wife works with humans as humans and you have to combine natural science, social science and philosophy to do that.
She uses all 3 in her work and she would end up unable to do her job if she only used evidence/truth, rationalism and epistemological realism.

I don't see how that is problem with regards to whether or not Richard Dawkins like or doesn't like philosophy? I think what he is against, is to solve the issues that you are referring to and that your wife use at work by using prayers etc. Why would he have a problem with what you mentioned, maybe I misunderstood you?

 

[F1fan]

The positive aspect of religion across all cultures functions to preserve spiritual values. Atheism is a negative force that doesn't preserve anything. Armchair critics on the road of life!

Atheism isn't any sort of force. Your assertion is an extreme exaggeration.

If you disagree, feel free to present evidence and a coherent argument that your claim is true today.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I see these knee-jerk radicalized atheists routinely asserting that philosophy is meaningless intellectual masturbation. That religion is dishonest, harmful, and should be eliminated. That art exists for nothing more than entertainment purposes. That morality is subjective and otherwise baseless. And that the reasoning behind all these assertions is that to expend intellectual energy on anything besides the quest to better understand functional physicality is an irrelevant and frivolous pursuit.

It's a deeply dehumanizing perspective that, were it held to by people in power, would result is a deeply dehumanizing and inhumane culture.

Once again, I have to say that I know nobody that fits your description. In fact, very often quite the opposite.

For example, in the absence of religion, it is more than a little necessary to engage in philosophy -- that is, after all, what humanism is. It's a philosophy for living well, for ourselves, for others and for our planet.

In many ways, religion is dishonest. Claiming, as both Christians and Muslims do, for example, that there is a hell provided for those who don't believe is 100% unknowable, and not only that, it is at odds with some of the most basic claims about God -- in both religions The "All Forgiving" and "All Merciful," for example. On the other hand, as I said earlier in this thread, no atheist I am aware of thinks religion should be eliminated. We do think that it should not be foist upon others unwiling to accept it, however. As @Revoltingest mentions earlier, being asked to swear over a "holy book" that you will tell the truth is an example -- and an insulting one, to boot. If I swear to tell the truth, I'll tell the truth, or if I cannot, I will say "I won't answer that."

"That art exists for nothing more than entertainment purposes" is certainly a claim that does not describe humanism (and most atheism) in the slightest. In fact, humanism insists that are is absolutely necessary in helping humans to undestand ourselves and our relationship with others and with our world, and that we would be immeasurably poorer without it.

"That morality is subjective and otherwise baseless" is another false claim. We do not in slightest think that morality is "baseless," we simply don't base it on somebody else's supposed "revelation." We base our morality on the belief in the inherent worth and dignity of every human, and their right to freely choose how each of us should live our lives. Thus, our morality is based on our need to make our world a better place for ourselves, others and the world itself. But yes, morality is subjective, because it cannot be totally objective. As I said elsewhere, while some religious "revelation" thinks that whacking children is good for them, most enlightened people today do not. And yet, if your baby is choking, whacking them upside down on the back -- hard -- is a very good thing. A dead baby is much, much worse than bruises or even broken bones.

And that the reasoning behind all these assertions is that to expend intellectual energy on anything besides the quest to better understand functional physicality is an irrelevant and frivolous pursuit.

And what I just explained above negates your last statement altogether.

 

[Sheldon]

joe1776 said: ↑
"Religion is the opiate of the people" (?)

That was an opinion by Karl Marx, is it really a dangerous thought

A partial quote at that, and as you say how is that dangerous exactly?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

"Religion is the opiate of the people" (?)

The full statement in Marx translates (including italics) as: "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."

Marx was trying to express the idea that religion helped to make people feel better so that they were less likely to make more serious effort to rid themselves of oppression and soulless conditions.

Not a bad thought at all, if you think about it.

 

[F1fan]

Like this one:
"...
Definitions
Atheism is the comprehensive world view of persons who are free from theism and have freed themselves of supernatural beliefs altogether. It is predicated on ancient Greek Materialism.
Atheism involves the mental attitude that unreservedly accepts the supremacy of reason and aims at establishing a life-style and ethical outlook verifiable by experience and the scientific method, independent of all arbitrary assumptions of authority and creeds.
Materialism declares that the cosmos is devoid of immanent conscious purpose; that it is governed by its own inherent, immutable, and impersonal laws; that there is no supernatural interference in human life; that humankind, finding the resources within themselves, can and must create their own destiny. It teaches that we must prize our life on earth and strive always to improve it. It holds that human beings are capable of creating a social system based on reason and justice. Materialism’s ‘faith’ is in humankind and their ability to transform the world culture by their own efforts. This is a commitment that is, in its very essence, life-asserting. It considers the struggle for progress as a moral obligation that is impossible without noble ideas that inspire us to bold, creative works. Materialism holds that our potential for good and more fulfilling cultural development is, for all practical purposes, unlimited."

Our Vision

I noticed you trimmed a lot of the crucial parts of that mission statement.

Over all the mission statement is pretty well crafted. But a person has to read it all, not just snipped pieces.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Oh dear, Tony, you struggle with atheism don't you.

I've not got time now but ... New Atheism was a term given by theists to describe the likes of Harris, Hitchens, etc and is not a term used by Atheists.
There are no leaders of Atheism, just some who can best express our thoughts.

I'll come back with more when I have time.

Actually no I do.not struggle with Atheism.

Basically my biggest struggle is with my own self.

I just happened to read this article and thought it would be good to discuss the points it raised, as some of those.points have been used in conversations on RF.


Regards Tony

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I noticed you trimmed a lot of the crucial parts of that mission statement.

Over all the mission statement is pretty well crafted. But a person has to read it all, not just snipped pieces.

To which statement are you referring? You provide no link-back or other clue.

 

[night912]

It amazes me how a lot of nonatheists always want to define what atheism/atheists are instead of letting the atheists define what atheism is and who atheists are.

 

[Kfox]

But these things do tend to go together. The person who does not believe in deities is also quite unlikely to believe in other supernatural claims, either. And for a common reason -- the desire to have at least some evidence to support what one is willing to accept as potentially true.

Atheists also tend to be male, white, liberal, and speak English; but let's not pretend as if that demographic represents atheism, it does not.

 

[lukethethird]

You atheist sure do manage to come together around bashing religion.

I don't believe you is bashing religion?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Oh how novel. Another atheist bashing thread based on the thoughts of a minority religion with delusions of grandure.

I will repeat, again

Atheism : disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Nothing more, nothing less. Anything added do that is down to individual misrepresentation


And your list reads like that of a fundamentalist religions daily chores.

What do younsee on the list that is incorrect?

I can but will not show how some.items.in the list are used in RF conversations.

My guess is anyone that does use the examples on that lost would know.

It's not about bashing, it is about critical thinking of ones approach to religious discussions, making then more fruitful.

Regards Tony

 

[Revoltingest]

But yes, morality is subjective, because it cannot be totally objective.

This is so for believers too. They deal with scripture that is
unclear, contradictory, & perhaps violates values/beliefs
they hold (IMO). So they subjectively choose what to believe
& what to ignore based upon personal choice.

Note:
I don't read their scriptures.
I go by what believers tell me.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I don't see how that is problem with regards to whether or not Richard Dawkins like or doesn't like philosophy? I think what he is against, is to solve the issues that you are referring to and that your wife use at work by using prayers etc. Why would he have a problem with what you mentioned, maybe I misunderstood you?

Well, for some of her citizens she is responsible for religion is relevant. But in general some natural scientists are not that strong in morality and ethics, because they in effect take their own subjectivity as a base for it.
You don't learn morality and ethics as a natural scientist and for some of the debates here are in effect also about morality and ethics.

Some place up thread I made a list of Ricard Dawkins and where he wasn't doing science.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I noticed you trimmed a lot of the crucial parts of that mission statement.

Over all the mission statement is pretty well crafted. But a person has to read it all, not just snipped pieces.

Yeah, so that which I chose is correct, right? And there are no problems in it, if you apply critical thinking to it, right?

I can point out at least 2 problematic parts.

 

[ChristineM]

What do younsee on the list that is incorrect?

I can but will not show how some.items.in the list are used in RF conversations.

My guess is anyone that does use the examples on that lost would know.

It's not about bashing, it is about critical thinking of ones approach to religious discussions, making then more fruitful.

Regards Tony

I think if you read through this thread you will see every one of the claims either contested of compared to religion, including your own.

And because religion is itself guilty of the items on your list you may count it as extremely hypocritical.

Singling out atheists shoes the OP is designed to bash atheists.

 

[lukethethird]

Actually no I do.not struggle with Atheism.

Basically my biggest struggle is with my own self.

I just happened to read this article and thought it would be good to discuss the points it raised, as some of those.points have been used in conversations on RF.


Regards Tony

You are aware that psychos capitalize atheism, no?

 

[ChristineM]

Atheists also tend to be male, white, liberal, and speak English; but let's not pretend as if that demographic represents atheism, it does not.

Example. Im female. But consider thecother points fairly accurate

Oh and i speak French as well as English and 4 other languages in varying levels of competence

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I think if you read through this thread you will see every one of the claims either contested of compared to religion, including your own.

And because religion is itself guilty of the items on your list you may count it as extremely hypocritical.

Singling out atheists shoes the OP is designed to bash atheists.

So just bash all of them, both religious people and the non-religious ones. And learn when religious people are not guilty of just as when non-religious people are not guilty of it.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

You have to be a bit more specific than that.
Whose prophecy are we talking about, and what does it say?

That would be a big topic in itself but basically it is written in the Bible that at the end of an era, the decline of humanity sets in when Gid is no longer the focus of our minds.

2 Timothy 3:2 being an example.

The Baha'i Writings also warn of our move away from God to our own preferences. The list of quotes would be immense.

I personally see we are all connected in mind, and we are yet to discover what the unity of mind does in this material world. But I am guessing it assists in the balance of nature.

Regards Tony