RE: Why Atheism Scares People (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

dcnovice -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/1/2012 8:01:10 PM)

quote:

Also as I've said before, it's probably going to come down to how you define god and morality,


Agreed. I think defining "human" is important too.



Kirata -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/1/2012 10:55:03 PM)


I'm not fond of moral dilemmas either, but they have proven a useful tool in the study of morality. And one thing we've learned from them is that people from different cultures -- different philosophies, different religions -- tend to respond in the same way. This, combined with infant and animal studies, tells us that morality is independent of philosophy and religion, reason and faith. So on the facts, my question merits more consideration than just a dismissive list of "as for" this and "as for" that.

K.



Kirata -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/1/2012 11:58:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

I think defining "human" is important too.

Not to argue with the dictionary, but in a clinical context it is often useful to distinguish between feeling and emotion. A good rule of thumb is, feelings are something you have, an emotion is something that has you. Our feelings may tell us that an action is wrong, we may know it in our heart, but a powerful emotion can override our deeper feelings. Too, the ability to be in touch with our feelings can be compromised by our cultures and psychological injury. But I am not the first person, nor will I be the last, to hold the view that if more people were able to be in touch with their feelings and to act from their hearts instead of calculation or emotion, we could free ourselves from much of the mayhem that blights this imperfect world.

K.



Kirata -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/2/2012 12:09:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

If you aren't going to apply reason, then what are you planning to apply?? Emotion??? That won't get us very far either. Disastrous.

See above, in response to dcnovice about what makes us human.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

everything I have said on this thread has been an attempt to be rational. Not to simply be emotional or instinctual. Because emotion and instinct don't always lead to the right answers. History has proven this repeatedly.

What history has proven repeatedly is that reason is a whore who will serve any premise, no matter how psychopathic or just plain wrong.

K.



fucktoyprincess -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/2/2012 6:17:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

I think defining "human" is important too.

Not to argue with the dictionary, but in a clinical context it is often useful to distinguish between feeling and emotion. A good rule of thumb is, feelings are something you have, an emotion is something that has you. Our feelings may tell us that an action is wrong, we may know it in our heart, but a powerful emotion can override our deeper feelings. Too, the ability to be in touch with our feelings can be compromised by our cultures and psychological injury. But I am not the first person, nor will I be the last, to hold the view that if more people were able to be in touch with their feelings and to act from their hearts instead of calculation or emotion, we could free ourselves from much of the mayhem that blights this imperfect world.

K.


With all due respect, I completely disagree. Most humans are atavistic, competitive by nature creatures, who if given the chance will only care for "their own" defined as family, extended family, and tribe. It takes a tremendous amount of reason to actually overcome people's inherent selfish natures. Allowed to follow either or both "feelings and emotions", would leave most of the worlds population without anything. It is a human being who said "let them eat cake", and she meant it. That was a pure expression of her "feeling" or "emotion". That was not reason speaking. And at the end of the day, that is what decent people are up against. And given the demographics of the world, and how people vote, and what policies they support (most of the worlds population don't believe in taxes - a feeling, an emotional response) but without something to support public policies a society cannot really evolve beyond Adam Smith's competitive state. I don't know too many people who enjoy from a "feeling" or "emotional" perspective, paying their taxes. it always still "feels" like money being taken away. One has to reason through the why we have taxes to make it palatable. If you enjoy paying taxes, then you are an exception on the globe.

Feelings and emotions as the sole basis of how to handle things will never work. Most people are selfish by nature. Again, even a child needs to be taught to share.



Kirata -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/2/2012 7:13:19 AM)


Well I'm sorry to say that in my view your position offers us little more than an example of assuming your conclusions and then reasoning "backwards" to them, issuing pronouncements of fact that lack support and ignoring evidence to the contrary.

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

Most humans are atavistic, competitive by nature creatures, who if given the chance will only care for "their own" ...selfish by nature... even a child needs to be taught to share.

Human cooperation is a key driving force behind the evolutionary success of our hominin lineage. At the proximate level, biologists and social scientists have identified other-regarding preferences – such as fairness based on egalitarian motives, and altruism – as likely candidates for fostering large-scale cooperation. A critical question concerns the ontogenetic origins of these constituents of cooperative behavior, as well as whether they emerge independently or in an interrelated fashion. The answer to this question will shed light on the interdisciplinary debate regarding the significance of such preferences for explaining how humans become such cooperative beings.

We investigated 15-month-old infants' sensitivity to fairness, and their altruistic behavior, assessed via infants' reactions to a third-party resource distribution task, and via a sharing task. Our results challenge current models of the development of fairness and altruism in two ways. First, in contrast to past work suggesting that fairness and altruism may not emerge until early to mid-childhood, 15-month-old infants are sensitive to fairness and can engage in altruistic sharing. Second, infants' degree of sensitivity to fairness as a third-party observer was related to whether they shared toys altruistically or selfishly, indicating that moral evaluations and prosocial behavior are heavily interconnected from early in development.

Reference: Fairness Expectations and Altruistic Sharing in 15-Month-Old Human Infants

K.



DomKen -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/2/2012 7:19:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

We do know that murder was proscribed in the code of Hamurabi and all other anceint compilations of law that have survived. Since many of those come from areas that had had no contact with the judeo christian religions when written it seems evident that murder, as well as theft and some other actions, were found to be unacceptable for the functioning of a community without the need for some sky guy telling anyone.


The Code of Hammurabi refers to temples and votaries, which would seem to suggest that the Babylonians had some sort of religious life.

As for other societies, does the lack of Judeo-Christian influence mean that they had no religious beliefs whatsover?

So your argument is that all the various sky guys exist and they all handed down morality to their followers? Or are you arguing that simply by holding an untrue religious belief these ancient cultures all decided murder was wrong?


You're putting words in my mouth, Ken. That's a strawman technique I'd associate with <insert notorious right-wing poster here>, and I'm sorry to see you stoop to it.

I have carefully taken no position on whether morality has a divine origin. I'm keenly aware that I haven't given the question nearly enough research or thought to answer it definitively. (I'm not entirely sure that anyone else on the thread has either, but that's their concern.)

I am simply, as someone who likes history and believe it deserves respect, exploring a (pre)historical question that arose in this thread, namely whether humans developed a sense of morality before or after they developed religion. You offered "the code of Hamurabi and all other anceint compilations of law that have survived" as examples of (if I understood you correctly) morality that was not based on religion. You also mentioned that some of those codes came "from areas that had had no contact with the judeo christian religions."

I noted that the Code of Hammurabi contained references to organized religion (temples and votaries). That makes it, imho, an odd example of a religion-free moral code. I also asked whether the absence of Judaism-Christianity meant, as you seemed to be implying in what honestly struck me as a sleight of hand, the absence of any religion. We are surely both aware that the world has more than one religion.

My point was that the judeo christian tradition is usually held up as the source of morality and my point was that murder as a crime (a sound marker for what we'd call morality) existed independently. I will point out that the babylonian gods were not considered to have a problem with their worshippers killing each other, the various city states fought many wars, which likely can be said for many other religions of the era and despite that every society that got to the point of writing down the rules of their society forbid murder.



Kirata -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/2/2012 7:33:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

My point was that the judeo christian tradition is usually held up as the source of morality and my point was that murder as a crime (a sound marker for what we'd call morality) existed independently.

I wouldn't call considering murder a crime to be, by itself, a sound marker for morality. Even in the Biblical tradition the proscription against murder applied only to killing another Hebrew, not anybody else. In my view, at least, there is no meaningful morality present unless it applies to everybody.

K.



dcnovice -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/2/2012 7:38:27 AM)

quote:

I will point out that the babylonian gods were not considered to have a problem with their worshippers killing each other, the various city states fought many wars, which likely can be said for many other religions of the era and despite that every society that got to the point of writing down the rules of their society forbid murder.


Ken, you seem to be conflating killing in warfare with one-on-one murder, and I'm not sure they're the same thing.

ETA: Also, didn't writing come comparatively recently in human history?



dcnovice -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/2/2012 7:42:29 AM)

quote:

It is a human being who said "let them eat cake", and she meant it.


I hate to seem like even more of a historical nitpicker than I am [:)], but there's actually a lot of skepticism about whether Marie Antoinette ever really said this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_them_eat_cake

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/550/did-marie-antoinette-really-say-let-them-eat-cake



dcnovice -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/2/2012 4:33:09 PM)

FR

On the feeling/reason question, have we considered the possibility that both my be important? It's hard for me to imagine a morality without empathy/compassion, but I can see how careful reasoning about the good of the community is important too.



Kirata -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/2/2012 11:15:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

On the feeling/reason question, have we considered the possibility that both my be important? It's hard for me to imagine a morality without empathy/compassion, but I can see how careful reasoning about the good of the community is important too.

Nobody has suggested that we abandon reason, of course, although that misrepresentation has been attempted. The point is that reason proceeds from premises, and premises that are not informed by our hearts will lead to conclusions that are heartless.

K.



GotSteel -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/3/2012 1:36:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice
quote:

It is a human being who said "let them eat cake", and she meant it.


I hate to seem like even more of a historical nitpicker than I am [:)], but there's actually a lot of skepticism about whether Marie Antoinette ever really said this.


Well I can put up plenty of examples of people thinking incredibly stupid things because they're thinking with their feelings: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VokvT0CyT5E



fucktoyprincess -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/3/2012 2:02:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice
quote:

It is a human being who said "let them eat cake", and she meant it.


I hate to seem like even more of a historical nitpicker than I am [:)], but there's actually a lot of skepticism about whether Marie Antoinette ever really said this.


Well I can put up plenty of examples of people thinking incredibly stupid things because they're thinking with their feelings: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VokvT0CyT5E


The Marie Antoinette quote was meant to serve as an example. Whether it can actually be attributed to her is actually somewhat irrelevant to the underlying point - which is that decisions motivated by emotion alone seldom lead to the correct answers when trying to determine policy for the public at large.

Our emotions are individual responses, and they do not always correspond to what law makes sense for everyone.

The Santorum video does not surprise me. This is exactly what happens when people think that private emotions should dictate how others behave.

One could, for example, be personally averse to the idea of having sex with someone of the same gender. In fact, most straight people, by definition would not be turned on by the idea of sex with the same gender. What does this tell us about whether or not someone supports gay rights? Their personal sexual orientation (which doesn't come from their rational side) actually tells us nothing about their attitude about what others should be free to do (which necessarily comes from a rational thought process). If we allow people to go with their "gut" we inevitably end up with a restrictive society based on fear. Personally, that's not what I would want. Obviously, others feel differently.



Kirata -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/3/2012 3:13:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

If we allow people to go with their "gut" we inevitably end up with a restrictive society based on fear. Personally, that's not what I would want. Obviously, others feel differently.

Misrepresenting what a person says and then sniffing superciliously about folks who "obviously" want a "society based on fear" is not a tactic likely to earn you much respect from anyone who values intellectual honesty.

K.



dcnovice -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/3/2012 3:47:56 PM)

quote:

The Marie Antoinette quote was meant to serve as an example. Whether it can actually be attributed to her is actually somewhat irrelevant to the underlying point


Whether a poster's factual statements withstand scrutiny strikes me as rather relevant to his or her credibility. Even more so for a pattern of getting facts wrong. Ymmv.



dcnovice -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/3/2012 3:57:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: GotSteel

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice
quote:

It is a human being who said "let them eat cake", and she meant it.


I hate to seem like even more of a historical nitpicker than I am [:)], but there's actually a lot of skepticism about whether Marie Antoinette ever really said this.


Well I can put up plenty of examples of people thinking incredibly stupid things because they're thinking with their feelings: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=VokvT0CyT5E


That seems a bit of a non sequitur. I was making a narrow historical point, namely that Marie Antoinette probably didn't utter the infamous words often put in her mouth. Ironically enough, I suspect that mal mot gained currency precisely because it depicted the queen as unfeeling.

In terms of head and heart, I think (as I said in post 451) that both are important and need to work in tandem.



dcnovice -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/3/2012 4:51:22 PM)

quote:

One could, for example, be personally averse to the idea of having sex with someone of the same gender. In fact, most straight people, by definition would not be turned on by the idea of sex with the same gender. What does this tell us about whether or not someone supports gay rights? Their personal sexual orientation (which doesn't come from their rational side) actually tells us nothing about their attitude about what others should be free to do (which necessarily comes from a rational thought process).


Drawing on my experience as a gay man, I'm not sure things work quite that neatly. A key point I've heard repeatedly from activists and community leaders who've looked long and hard at the challenge of winning support for gay rights is that the leading factor in shaping a person's attitude about homosexuality tends to be whether he or she knows any gay people. That personal/emotional connection seems to sway more folks than argument does. You may recall that when Justice Powell provided the swing vote, which he later regretted, to uphold sodomy laws in Bowers v. Hardwick, he told a closeted clerk that he didn't know any gay people.



Kirata -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/4/2012 3:27:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

when Justice Powell provided the swing vote, which he later regretted, to uphold sodomy laws in Bowers v. Hardwick, he told a closeted clerk that he didn't know any gay people.

Ironically, it wouldn't surprise me if he did... and didn't even know it.

K.



dcnovice -> RE: Why Atheism Scares People (6/4/2012 5:48:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

when Justice Powell provided the swing vote, which he later regretted, to uphold sodomy laws in Bowers v. Hardwick, he told a closeted clerk that he didn't know any gay people.

Ironically, it wouldn't surprise me if he did... and didn't even know it.

K.

Same here. Folks were less likely to be out back in 1986, particularly at work. I do sometimes wonder whether the clerk's saying "Well actually, sir, you know me..." would have made a difference/



Page: <<   < prev  20 21 22 [23] 24   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.0625