 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in World Affairs/Debate. |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Atheism versus Religion |
New poll |  | Thread closed |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| User | Post | ||
MathOnNapkins  1100  In SPC700 HELL                   Since: 11-18-05 Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6278 days |
| ||
| I was reading a book by Richard Dawkins yesterday, I believe it was called The God Delusion, which deals with atheism and many of the things that frustrate him about religion and its involvement in society. This got me to thinking... how do you view atheism and atheists? Do you think things would be different if aeons from now, everyone was an atheist? I mean, I think about raising kids when I have them someday, and how things would turn out if I didn't take them to church. And more hypothetically, what if there wasn't a church to take them to...
Secondly, is it possible to have morals without theism? And if so, what are the morals based upon and what gives them value? I know Dawkins apparently addresses this in his book, but I haven't read that far. I read about 100 pages of it at a local bookstore, but am skeptical of buying it b/c he seems to base all his arguments on evolution, which I don't see as a necessary reason or argument for atheism; in fact, his overuse of the theory nauseates me. |
|||
Young Guru Snifit   Since: 11-18-05 From: Notre Dame, IN Last post: 6285 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| I do think that there would still be morals without theism. There are certain things that people just know by rational reasons that are morally right or wrong. Stealing from someone is wrong, killing someone is wrong, most of these are based on the do unto others as you would have done unto you, which doesn't necesitate religious background to understand. Though I'm a religious person I don't think that atheism is a bad thing. Atheism can be reached quite readily through logic and I've yet to see a compellingly strong arguement for the existance of God so it's not illogical to be atheist. If someone is atheist because they don't think about life and what caused us to be then that's not so good, especially if they are attacking religious views, because there is a lack of effort on their part to evaluate the situation. Atheists who challenge religion after thinking about the posibilities of a God doesn't upset me because I at least know they have thought about it. | |||
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 6280 days Last view: 6280 days |
| ||
Originally posted by MathOnNapkins Some people need a parole officer to keep them in line but that doesn't mean I do. If the only reason you're behaving yourself is the big reward/punishment system in the sky, then something is seriously wrong. |
|||
rubixcuber Mole  Since: 09-08-06 From: St. Louis, MO Last post: 6388 days Last view: 6388 days |
| ||
| I think that not only is it possible to have morals without theism, but it is better to have non-religious grounded moral systems. I agree that acting morally just because of some supposed judgement by god isn't really acting morally at all. You're just trying to better yourself by pleasing god. Relegion based morals tend to vary from religion to religion and cause disagreement and conflict. While this would still be true for most other moral systems, I think it would be to a much lesser degree and not as animate.
If everyone became an atheist, things would certainly be different. The large systems put in place by religion would no longer exist. Where would all of the resources from churches go? I would hope into something worthwhile, but that would likely not be the case. I think that if the idea of religion had never come about, we could achieve a better society, but with religion already existing, it will probably not be going anywhere. |
|||
|
Sinfjotle Lordly? No, not quite.  Since: 11-17-05 From: Kansas Last post: 6280 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
 You guys fail.
Just because I don't believe in God doesn't mean I can't learn something from the bible. "The moral of the story..." Hell, even fairy tales offer something in the way of guidance. Also, I'm glad there was religion. Culture is important, especially religion. Imagine how many people would just give up on life if they didn't believe there was a reward at the end? If nothing else, the motivation is fine. |
|||
|
Arwon Bazu Since: 11-18-05 From: Randwick, Sydney, NSW, Australia Last post: 6280 days Last view: 6280 days |
| ||
| Don't you think that's depressing though? all this false hope? All these people whose happiness and sanity hinges on what might well be a delusion? | |||
|
Young Guru Snifit Since: 11-18-05 From: Notre Dame, IN Last post: 6285 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| Theism doesn't necesitate religion. It often leads to it, but it doesn't need it. Theism is the belief that there is a god (or gods, not positive about the plural) that has created the universe and everything in it. Many of the objections I've heard from atheists towards religion are most often based on the short comings on the religion of churches (and I'll be the first to admit that there are many involved in Christian churches who do not uphold the values of the beliefs of that faith). They point to the extravagant decorations in churches, misused money, child abuse, and many of the other problems of religion, and my only defense of my beliefs to these statements is that what the church does is not what I believe. There are a lot of things that the Catholic Church supports, like service to others, tithe, etc. that I am a staunch supporter of but then there are other aspects, the alienation and stigmatization of homosexuals being one of them, that I strongly oppose. Anyways, in an attempt to make a more relevant statement, I think theists and atheists both have good support for their beliefs but neither of them can fully disprove the other, and I for me I fall into the theist side of belief no matter how often I'm told that it might be a fasle hope, because I find hope much better than the alternative. | |||
|
rubixcuber Mole Since: 09-08-06 From: St. Louis, MO Last post: 6388 days Last view: 6388 days |
| ||
| How many people would give up on life if there wasn't a reward at the end? No offense, but I think these people should be removed from the gene pool anyways. | |||
|
Young Guru Snifit Since: 11-18-05 From: Notre Dame, IN Last post: 6285 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| I would think that if you came to the conclusion that there was no reward at the end of life you would just end up living your life as you wanted to without regards to certain morals. I think that most people wouldn't just go around hurting people, but they probably wouldn't have the same strict morality that some religions prescribe. If you think about it, can you think of where you were before you were born? I'm gonna go out on a limb and say NOPE. If that doesn't make you despair (and I don't really think it should) then there's nothing about there being nothing after death that should cause you to despair about life. | |||
Jomb Deddorokku  Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 6281 days Last view: 6281 days |
| ||
| All good morals requires is the ability to empathize with other people. Having empathy has nothing to do with religion.
When a person has no empathy for other people but still behaves in a moral way simply because they fervently believe in their religion, we are in serious danger from them. What happens when some event happens to them which shakes up their belief? When that crutch falls away there will be nothing to prevent them from acting out in potentially dangerous ways. Or, what happens when their belief system gets hijacked by fanatical madmen? Then we get suicide bombers. The strongest system of right and wrong is one which is internal to the person and not religion based. "I think theists and atheists both have good support for their beliefs but neither of them can fully disprove the other" Is it really that one cant be disproved, or is it that one group refuses to accept the facts? |
|||
Silvershield  580  Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6291 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
I would like to comment at length, but for the moment...
Originally posted by JombYeah, explain this. |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 6281 days Last view: 6281 days |
| ||
| What's there to explain? It's a matter of faith, right? So facts are irrelevant, or so I've been told. | |||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6291 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
Originally posted by JombYour phrasing pretty much explicitly states that people who are religious "ignore" the facts that would disprove their religion. Certainly fath exists without hard, factual evidence, but it's not as if there is such hard, factual evidence in the world today that disproves any of the great religions. |
|||
|
C:/xkas bio.asm Compiled ASM code  Since: 11-17-05 Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6278 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Silvershield I have yet to met ONE christian that wouldn't ignore the fact that fossil of major state of human's evolution exist(If God created us, then WTF are those doing here?), that life is possible to create chimicaly(proving that God wasn't needed at all to create us), that no archeological proof of the great flood exist... Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Religous theory are ignoring fact and by following it, religious people are ignoring them |
|||
|
Silvershield 580 Since: 11-19-05 From: Emerson, New Jersey Last post: 6291 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Water BioIf you have yet to meet such a Christian, then you haven't met many Christians. Few that I know will deny evolution or any of its associated sciences, because none of that offers any sort of disproof of God. Only a fundamentalist who takes Scripture literally (despite its numerous contraditions and assorted other "flaws") will explicitly deny any science of that sort, because in his worldview it might disprove God; any religious person who understands how science and faith can coexist will not be swayed in the slightest by it. |
|||
witeasprinwow Since: 12-29-05 Last post: 6388 days Last view: 6388 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Arwon Not really. Can you prove ANYTHING is concrete? Even the keyboard you're typing on? Probably not. If it makes them happy then cool, let them believe it. |
|||
|
C:/xkas bio.asm Compiled ASM code Since: 11-17-05 Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6278 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Silvershield I indeed didn't meet many Christan (that what happen when you live in a mostly Atheist town  ). Denying evolution only because it can't disprove whenever of not God exist is a bad reason, since evolution is refering to the origin of mankind and not the existence of God
also, this wasn't about denying theory, but ignoring fact, wich is what Intelligent design theist are doing (edited by Water Bio on 10-18-06 12:56 AM) |
|||
|
Ziff B2BB BACKTOBASICSBITCHES Since: 11-18-05 From: A room Last post: 6279 days Last view: 6278 days |
| ||
| Funny, that. I actually agree with a lot of what Dawkins and atheists think about the state of religion (and there is a lot that I disagree with). I mean, it is kind of hard to be a Catholic that holds onto a tradition that includes the idea of institutionalized God all the while being a semi-supporter of Reformation ideas of unster gott.
But in the terms of it, Dawkins and others argue that it is religious dogmatics and fanatics that are the big problem. When you pick up a name like Darwin's Bulldog and are a dogmatic and fanatic atheist...well, I only see a glimmering Imax lamp of hypocricy. |
|||
|
mastahwolf Newcomer  Since: 10-18-06 Last post: 6402 days Last view: 6402 days |
| ||
| there's no need for religion to have a moral behavior toward other people | |||
|
Young Guru Snifit Since: 11-18-05 From: Notre Dame, IN Last post: 6285 days Last view: 6279 days |
| ||
| To add on to what Silver Shield said, Theism doesn't contradit evolution at all. As far as I know from my education as an engineer in science and other things, we don't really have a good concrete idea for how the universe began. We have our theories, like the big bang, and others but none of those have been proven, they just have varying degrees of possibility that no scientist should be willing to accept as absolute fact (or even probably fact, at most I'd say plausible). What we do have a pretty good grasp on is evolution, I think it's correct and think that those who claim it to be false are just denying the facts (I actually know a girl who is a genius chemical biologists and she doesn't think the facts supporting evolution are strong enough, just baffling considering her science background). Moving on to how this relates to God, let me pose you this question. What's more impressive, a god that says, hey guys look, I made the earth and people just poof, out of nothing, or a god who creates a situation which through billions of years evolves slowly and eventually leads to the set of circumstances that we are in now. This is how I view Catholic creation stories in harmony with science. And the bible is not to be taken literaly, any inteligent person would know this and if one studies the bible and faiths based on it they would be doing a great disservice to their faith by taking it as fact.
And by my previous statement about neither side being able to disprove the other, talk to any philosopher who studies proofs for/against the existance of a god. Anyone worth their wieght in philosophy will say that there is no arguement that can prove with 100% certainty that the other is wrong, they come close, but not all the way. This is why some say that even atheists have faith, faith that God doesn't exist, because there is no absolute proof to assure them of the non-existance of God. I will admit that there probably is a greater necessity for faith for Theists as oppossed to Atheists. As the good Albert Einstein put it in two seperate ways, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." "My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble mind." And I stick by it. edit: Just tacked on some quotes. (edited by Young Guru on 10-18-06 05:17 PM) |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Add to favorites | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - World Affairs/Debate - Atheism versus Religion |
| Thread closed |
