h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

It seems like you´re expecting to be told there´s some kind of atheist rule book. There isn´t, we just have to use our heads instead. Try to figure out on our own what to do.

In the old testament, Abraham tries to kill his own son. I´d suggest most atheists would consider that to be a bad deed.

Atheists (42 new posts)

Rather pleasing, that.

I'd suggest that most of us, theist and atheist alike, get the bulk of our morality from the same place: society. Atheist and theist morality tend to be not that different in essentials.

Atheists tend, however, to be less tribal than theists. They are also more likely to accept that "X is icky to me" does not equate to "X is immoral and those who do it should be punished". They therefore tend to have fewer sexual hangups, and have, on balance, a more live-and-let-live attitude.

There are, of course, exceptions.

TRiG.

A quick search for "Atheism" turns up the following, some of which I've read.

A46904871 'Positive Atheism'
A254477 Atheism
A44196906 'Atheophobia'
A18592815 The Invisible Pink Unicorn Edited 18%
A446339 Agnosticism
A216631 Nihilism
A937767 The Stages of Belief
A21648783 Occam's Razor
A45561107 Atheists and Christmas

Those I haven't read, I shall read after dinner.

Hungry now.

TRiG.

Xanatic,if there is no atheist rule book then atheists can have diffеrent views on moral. Moral values of one atheist can diffеr from moral values of other atheists.

Xanatic,if there is no atheist rule book then atheists can have different views on moral. Moral values of one atheist can differ from moral values of other atheists.

Well, as mentioned earlier atheist only have in common that they don´t believe in God. You wouldn´t necessarily expect much in common between people who don´t like brussels sprouts either.

Most people have some kind of empathy, to an extent they feel other´s pain. This is the basis for most people´s morality I would say, and what tends to make people avoid things that cause others immediate and obvious pain. Of course we may have a much easier time doing something which causes problems to people we will never meet. The problem is religion can make people do many bad things, thanks to the threat of eternal damnation. Much like how someone could be made to do terrible things if you put a gun to their head.

So morality is not an absolute. Scary eh? Cor, it gets worse... Justice, Art, Whether Brussels Sprouts are an Abomination or Not, it would give me a headache if I didn't subscribe to a kind of diet nihilism.

>>Moral values of one atheist can differ from moral values of other atheists<<

Next up on the Igor News Network: the sun will rise tomorrow, probably in the east. And our shocking expose on winter always following autumn.

I think Iago captures the spirirt of the retort perfectly, however Igor I wonder if we might press a little into your own thinking on this, as it strikes me you seem to think the idea of people, (let alone those awful atheists) holding differing moral values between individuals is a bad thing, - is that correct? If so what do you propose the alternative is?

What has 'morality' got to do with it?
I've never yet seen an adaquat definition of what morality is.
From which I can only pressume that even between those who seemingly claim* to hold the same moral values , that they really don't... as its just such a vague notion...

Trouble is that in the past those of a religious persuasion always implied that atheists had no morality and that morality was the fiefdom of Christians because a belief in God gave them a moral compass.


Maybe it's this that has made some atheists feel marginalised and Dawkins has just given them a voice.A Somewhat militant one but a voice none the less.

Not that I paid any attention to what Christians thought of me or any other member of any religion and I'm not inclined to be part of any organisation that seeks to turn the tables on those who are religious.

My natural inclination as an atheist is to just chill out ,live my life and try and respect others beliefs and to try not make judgements about them.There are just too many people who deal in absolutes which is ridiculous as life is devoid of them..

Morality is a big

I refer back to Pit`s post 16:
>>
Theists: "I BELIEVE there`s a God."
Atheists: "I BELIEVE there is no such thing."
Believers, both of them - and I`m wary of believers; they tend to clobber you over the head...<<

Yes, I`ve read the rest of the backlog and I`m sorry I wasn`t here sooner to say it, but Pit is entirely correct.
I have said before and will likely say again that capital A - Atheists are Believers and Followers.

For one thing they Believe in Scientific `proofs` of such abstract and unprovable ideas as the Big Bang Theory
which quite honestly requires more Faith than the notion of a wise All-father.

And they tend to be Followers of those Scientists and Philosophers who use their position to `preach` against
established organised religions.

The word agnostic will never have a capital A.
And for me and many it simply means `I dunno` and `I do not believe anyone ever could know for certain` and
`Getting upset or angry over such issues (especially questions of who is right or not) is beyond silliness, verging
on religiose self-righteous delusion`.

peace
jwf

Part of me would like to be like that but there are folk who spend weeks starving themselves, some who are conned in to giving away money they don't have and some who kill others in the name of their religion.

I'll stick to being rational and wishing the rest of the world would join in.

That ^^ was a response to 52.

jwf of post 54.

"Yes, I`ve read the rest of the backlog and I`m sorry I wasn`t here sooner to say it, but Pit is entirely correct."

No. You are wrong. Gnostic Atheism is mostly populated by people would practice a religious faith, such a Buddhism, that doesn't include gods.

If you do not believe in a god or gods you are an atheist. Agnosticism is not a credible or intellectually honest position in it's own right. It just a modifying term applied to describe what kind of atheism or theism you subscribe to.


"For one thing they Believe in Scientific `proofs` of such abstract and unprovable ideas as the Big Bang Theory
which quite honestly requires more Faith than the notion of a wise All-father."

Maybe in your bubble universe that is true. But in the reality the rest of us inhabit that kind of statement is worthy of nought but ridicule.
The LHC will back on like in a matter of days, it will quickly be simulating the conditions present at the Big Bang. The Big Bang happened. It was billions of years ago. Get over it.

"And they tend to be Followers of those Scientists and Philosophers who use their position to `preach` against
established organised religions."

I spent part of my life as Shepherd. It's my observation that is a term aptly applied to believers and the phrase "herding s is apt to unbelievers.

I don't share Dan Dennett's views on Free Will and Compatibilism, I don't follow him, I listen to his ideas and reflect upon them and reach my own conclusions on their validity. I don't look to him for moral teaching or other guidance on my life. The same goes for Dawkins and Hitchens. Phil Plait, Ben Goldacre, Simon singh, Adam Savage, Jon Ronson and all the others who I listen to for their ideas on atheism, scepticism, free thought, humanism, science and rationalism.

"The word agnostic will never have a capital A."

Really?
It seems to me that you are smugly and self-righteously contending that Agnosticism deserves a capitalised "a". Preaching that Agnosticism is the philosophy of the Enlightened. Rather than the position dogmatically held to by those too ignorant of what the words "agnostic" and "atheist" mean or just too spineless to admit what they believe.
Absolute certainty is not required. Just the honesty with oneself to admit what one believes. If you ask yourself "do I believe in gods?" to really answer back, "I dunno" is absurd. You either believe or you don't, whether or not it is knowable is another question entirely.
Given that the definition of gods can be so easily inflated to one that is unfalsifiable, one has admit that science can not know for certain if every single person's fancy is false, but thankfully logic comes to our rescue and kicks the that dead parrot around the room.

I wonder if your issue is really with Antitheism. Atheism is a position. Antitheism is philosophy. Antitheism seeks to oppose the harm done by the self-righteous delusions of those that claim they that know a god exists and what he wants them to do in his name.

"For one thing they Believe in Scientific `proofs` of such abstract and unprovable ideas as the Big Bang Theory
which quite honestly requires more Faith than the notion of a wise All-father."


Your using the term 'believe' in an unsuitable way. Your using it as if it were in a sentence, of the type:
"I am a believer in God"
Which it isn't.
Its an entirely differnt term, as its not assocated with 'faith'.
Without that definition of 'believe', the entire premise falls to pieces.

Abstract, unprovable?
Again, your looking at a definition of these as related solely to 'belief' in a 'religious' or 'theist' type way, which its not.
For proof in a God, or a religion, we need only heresay and entirely abstract idology which then sits as 'roof' in that context.
Which is quite differnt from the nature and types of 'proof' as can be gotten to by using various statistical and scientific methodologies...
So, a theist can say 'its quite logical to think that some 'being' just created the universe out of thin air on a whim', and that is utterly irafutible and has proof, as it was written down in a book some thousand of years ago... strange...
man at teh pub told me he is Elvis. So I just believe him.

"we atheists usually eat barbed wire for breakfast, and butcher a few christians for lunch. and at night we go to the theatre to see christians fight with lions"

Hahahaha funny.
*hides under desk from scary atheist

Many people are saying you don't become an atheist, you just are one or born that way.

Wrong

I, personally think atheism is what any normal person would believe if they grew up in a religious vaccuum. It makes the most sense at first glance. But then I believe that it makes philosophical sense to examine all possibilities, and I am sure I would come to the conclusion that god exists without religious prodding, though I may not have imagined God as some personallity, similar to people.

My main point here is that one may be "born" religious or "born" atheist, but that should have no bearing on ones adult final decision. Granted it probably alway will, but thats another subject. Eventually someone thinks through things and decides to "become" one or the other. Or some don't even think at all, and just walk around with a silly smile on their face all their life, haha.