What do Atheists Want?

[ppp]

If religion is the problem, why put a flame to it

What a bizarre statement.
If slavery is the problem, why put a flame to it
If child abuse is the problem, why put a flame to it
If rape is the problem, why put a flame to it
If lynching is the problem, why put a flame to it

That sort of thinking is insufficiently moral.

there are much more controversial events on the news today

There aren't. There are some that are as much of an issue, but none more.

 

[Jacob Samuelson]

You may have heard the story of the Caesars going on chariot rides around the city of Rome, receiving adulation, while a slave stands behind them whispering, You are mortal. You are mortal. into his ear over and over again. This is some what similar.

for the better part of two millennia Christians have been in a place of authority where they tell one another stories about non Christians through which they give themselves license to demonize, shun, imprison, torture, and kill those who do not share their beliefs with a sense of righteous impunity. And because of their strength in the population, and their sense of a divine mission, they are difficult to stop. While the situation is better than it was 50 years ago, this is by no means a thing of the past.

It is in my best interest, and IMHO, the best interest of our society, to remind Christians that the stories humblebrag to one another about their own moral rectitude, and the slavering depravity of non-Christians is, to be frank, an ongoing session of mutual ego masturbation. I saw it in youth and adult church groups when I was a Christian, and while it has eased over the decades in some denominations, such behavior is still prevalent enough to be an issue.

It is also in my interest (and the interest of my progeny) to track the current apologetics that infest our educational and and government systems. From the depraved indifference of Christians throughout the AIDS crisis to the attempts to insert their religion into science classrooms, to their attempts to override medical decisions with religious dogma.

It sounds like a lot of what you said is what you don't want, but I don't believe you answered what you do? Not having something in society doesn't fix society it just makes it fill it up with something else equally as deplorable in my opinion. Or at least so has been the case in History.

 

[Ella S.]

These are wonderful things. Are you consciously aware that none of these things are permanent?

Yes? Who isn't?

You will get old and possibly sick, you won't be beautiful and the only practical contribution society will remember will eventually ripple away no matter how influential you become. Are you satisfied that you will not get what you want?

How will I not get what I want? Just because, if I get it, it's not going to last forever? Well, I still had it, didn't I? And why would I care whether people will remember me after I'm dead? I won't be around to care.

All of the things I listed exist in degrees, not as binaries. I can try to maximize them as best I can as long as I'm alive. Once I'm dead, it doesn't really matter anymore. I'd hardly say that means I will not get what I want. To some extent, I already have what I want.

I don't mean to be rude, but are you satisfied with your life being compared to a teetsy fly who only value is to reproduce just so their kids could live another day longer than them.

I am unaffected by the comparisons you make with my life.

Do you really get what you want from that life?

There are many things I still hope to accomplish before I die and I find meaning in striving towards them in the moment. I could die tomorrow and have it all erased but that doesn't mean that it never had any meaning, just that it would no longer have any meaning to me.

Is it logical for the teetsy fly to continue its existence? Should it not go extinct?

"Ought" statements are outside of the realm of classical logic. Attempts to derive "ought" statements logically are usually considered, under normal circumstances, a Naturalistic Fallacy.

However, the ancient Greeks had a more general understanding of logic that included following one's purpose known as one's "inner logos" or "nature."

Flies specifically adapted to be able to survive, just as every other species on this earth. In a sense, the whole organism of the fly was naturally selected with the express purpose of ensuring the survival of its genetic code and its DNA is its "nature" that propels it towards this.

Therefore, I would argue that it would be illogical for a fly to do anything other than continue its existence. Even its own sense of purpose, if it has one, is a trait that it adapted in order to survive.

 

[Ludi]

Yes the first part is true, as the first death is true, but it has nothing to do with death itself, with that being the second death. And Jesus did give us life, but He exercised no control over what we did with our life, free will. So we were allowed to be our own gods. Which is basically why Jesus said that He did not do His Own will, but the will of the one who sent Him.

 

[Jacob Samuelson]

There aren't. There are some that are as much of an issue, but none more.

No one is arguing about Virgin Births on the news. They are arguing about whether their is going to be a WW!!!. Interesting how you think those are equally controversial

 

[Ludi]

I should have added that we decided our own fate, life or death.

 

[ppp]

It sounds like a lot of what you said is what you don't want, but I don't believe you answered what you do?

I want those things to not be in our society.

Not having something in society doesn't fix society it just makes it fill it up with something else equally as deplorable in my opinion.

If I make rape a crime, what do I have to then fill it with?

 

[Jacob Samuelson]

Yes? Who isn't?

Theist are only subconsciously aware that these things aren't permanent. Anyone who consciously states they will see their loved one after they die must be consciously aware these things you want are permanent.

 

[ppp]

No one is arguing about Virgin Births on the news. They are arguing about whether their is going to be a WW!!!. Interesting how you think those are equally controversial

It's interesting how you are pretending that virgin births are what is being legislated, and/or demonized. Your approach is implicitly dishonest.

 

[Jacob Samuelson]

All of the things I listed exist in degrees, not as binaries. I can try to maximize them as best I can as long as I'm alive. Once I'm dead, it doesn't really matter anymore. I'd hardly say that means I will not get what I want. To some extent, I already have what I want.

If you already have what you want than you no longer want those things. Is that not true? How could you want what you already have?

 

[RestlessSoul]

What exactly would I be on trial, subject to judgment, for?

If God is all-powerful, then everything that is, everything that ever happens, only happens according to [his] will. When you're all-powerful, ALL the bucks stop at your desk. No one else has responsibility, no one else CAN have responsibility.
My earlier >answer to that question< needs no amendment.
I'm technically an igtheist, not an atheist, but either way I'm an unbeliever. However, my view of my own death is well expressed in the Tanakh:

Ecclesiastes 3:19 For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same; as one dies, so dies the other. They all have the same breath, and man has no advantage over the beasts; for all is vanity. 20 All go to one place; all are from the dust, and all turn to dust again.

Ecclesiastes 9:5 For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward; but the memory of them is lost.

Ecclesiastes 9:10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might; for there is no work or thought or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol, to which you are going.​

You forgot Ecclesiastes 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

 

[firedragon]

If you want a peaceful life and life how you want, what persuaded atheists to come to this forum that is full of everyone and anyone arguing and questioning about religion. If religion is the problem, why put a flame to it, there are much more controversial events on the news today, what peaceful life do you hope here?

I have already explained that in the post you are replying to Jacob. I said, that only a few come to forums. Religious or atheists. So you didnt understand what I said, or you didn't read it through.

Think about how many Atheists live around the world, and how many are in this forum. How many theists are around the world, and how many are in this forum?

When I say "few", that does not mean one or two. That is in proportion of the whole. And I told you that many of us commit the fallacy of composition.

Hope you understand.

 

[Jacob Samuelson]

Therefore, I would argue that it would be illogical for a fly to do anything other than continue its existence. Even its own sense of purpose, if it has one, is a trait that it adapted in order to survive.

Bingo! I think you solved the logical puzzle of why it is illogical for man to even consider that its own existence will not continue. Purpose is key to why humans believe in God and why they believe after death there is a reason. For me, a teetsy fly's life is only logical because it still exists after who knows how long. We are trying to find purpose and the only logical purpose is creation right?

 

[Ella S.]

If you already have what you want than you no longer want those things. Is that not true? How could you want what you already have?

Have you ever played Tetris?

In Tetris, one has to quickly move puzzle-pieces called "tetrimonos" in an attempt to form a line as they "drop" from the top of the screen. Every time you make a straight, horizontal line from one side of the playing field to the other out of the tetrimonos, the line is erased and all of the pieces of the remaining tetrimonos above that line drop down.

If you fail to make a line for too long, the tetrimonos keep dropping and end up stacking on top of one another until they reach the top of the screen. Once they reach the top of the screen, the game ends and prints you a high score.

What is it that people playing Tetris want? Well, they want to play Tetris, that's why they play it.

 

[Ella S.]

Bingo! I think you solved the logical puzzle of why it is illogical for man to even consider that its own existence will not continue. Purpose is key to why humans believe in God and why they believe after death there is a reason. For me, a teetsy fly's life is only logical because it still exists after who knows how long. We are trying to find purpose and the only logical purpose is creation right?

No, creation cannot be a logical purpose because we are not created beings since there is no God.

ETA: Neither can we derive purpose from a life after death because there is no life after death.

 

[RestlessSoul]

You essentially just said "Anyone who is rational is, by definition, an agnostic."

I think that's fascinating. I've seen theists chuck atheists under the bus and atheists chuck theists under the bus. I think this is the first time that I've seen an agnostic chuck them both under the bus.

In reality, one can hold a position and still be willing to change it, but the popular usage of atheist isn't even referring to a specific claim. It just refers to people who are without theism.

In fact, a rational agent would believe in things that are justified to believe in, even if those things are false, and be willing to change their beliefs in accordance with new data. This is how Bayesian epistemology works, which is a major influence on how many scientific papers analyze their data.

I don’t think anyone is getting chucked under a bus here. I’m quite happy to concede that agnosticism is the default position of a rational person. If by agnostic we mean a person unwilling to commit to an opinion on something which seemingly cannot, ultimately, be known, then such a position is surely where logic and reason must lead us; beyond this point we cannot travel without some other guide. Which is where God comes in.

I am not agnostic about the existence of God, because I have had personal experience of what God can do for those who want and need Him enough. For a rational person who has not had these experiences, I concede that agnosticism is not only rational, it is the inevitable conclusion of the reasoning mind.

 

[Ella S.]

I don’t think anyone is getting chucked under a bus here. I’m quite happy to concede that agnosticism is the default position of a rational person. If by agnostic we mean a person unwilling to commit to an opinion on something which seemingly cannot, ultimately, be known, then such a position is surely where logic and reason must lead us; beyond this point we cannot travel without some other guide. Which is where God comes in.

I am not agnostic about the existence of God, because I have had personal experience of what God can do for those who want and need Him enough. For a rational person who has not had these experiences, I concede that agnosticism is not only rational, it is the inevitable conclusion of the reasoning mind.

Maybe you should re-read the post I'm replying to. They made it very clear that anyone willing to change their position in accordance with evidence is an agnostic and can't be an atheist (or a theist, either, if the reasoning holds)

 

[Jacob Samuelson]

What is it that people playing Tetris want? Well, they want to play Tetris, that's why they play it.

That is only on the surface. Playing Tetris isn't fulfilling the want. The want is to get rid of boredom or to release dopamine and adrenaline that they can't release anywhere else. If you want only go as deep as the Tetris be my guest, but when you really understand that it is not that simple and there are real desires and superficial desires. You can go really learn more about yourself if you actually know what you really want. Beauty, Health, and Influence are really cries for a more primitive desire and I it would be nice to explore what they are sometime.

 

[Ludi]

If you could ask one question related to Scripture, and have it answered what it would it be?

 

[Ella S.]

That is only on the surface. Playing Tetris isn't fulfilling the want. The want is to get rid of boredom or to release dopamine and adrenaline that they can't release anywhere else.

Oh boy. Are we going to get into wants-as-an-end and wants-as-a-means here?

Honestly, it's completely irrelevant if somebody has another reason why they want to play Tetris. They still want to play Tetris. That's all that matters for the sake of compariosn.

If you want only go as deep as the Tetris be my guest, but when you really understand that it is not that simple and there are real desires and superficial desires. You can go really learn more about yourself if you actually know what you really want. Beauty, Health, and Influence are really cries for a more primitive desire and I it would be nice to explore what they are sometime.

I assure you that you do not have a deeper understanding of my own mind than I do but if you're so sure that you know what I "truly want," then why do you waste my time asking me what I want?

You don't know what I want. You won't even listen when I try to tell you so you probably can't ever really know what I want. Good luck with your one-sided conversations.