tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post7101743492823885946..comments2023-12-01T18:05:24.875-05:00Comments on Debunking Christianity: A New Era for Atheism: Moral RealismUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger63125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-64040542493874645712010-01-14T06:19:53.091-05:002010-01-14T06:19:53.091-05:00Concerning the objectivity of morality, I am neith...Concerning the objectivity of morality, I am neither a moral relativist nor a moral subjectivist but a proponent of an error theory: moral statements and truths are in fact nothing more than the products of our emotional intuitions , but because of the hard-wiring of our brain, we erroneously believe they correspond to some external facts of the objective reality and try to derive them from pure natural facts, committing the is/ought fallacy.<br />For those interested in the line of thinking presented here, I highly recommend you to read Joshua Greene’s dissertation, where he clearly demonstrates the true nature of morality and develops a coherent error-theory.<br />http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~jgreene/GreeneWJH/Greene-Dissertation.pdf<br />To conclude, although I am not a moral realist, I do think there is a place for ethic in each human life.<br />But instead of using moral absolutes such as “good”, “evil”, “right”, “wrong”, “ought”, “ought not”, referring to spooky concepts whose existence is as likely as the presence of an invisible yellow unicorn on the surface of Mars, I prefer to employ the language of desires, which correspond to indisputable facts:<br />We, as human being, love infant life and desire baby to growth and become happy, therefore if we want our desires to be fulfilled, then we ought not to torture babies for the fun. Contrarily to moral realism, the ‘ought’ I have used here is hypothetical and not categorical.<br />In the same way, I can not say the atrocities we find in the Old Testament are objectively wrong, because I don’t believe in the existence of such moral absolutes, but I can express my convictions in the following manner: if we want our intuitive feelings of love, justice and charity to be respected, then we ought to reject many books of the Old Testament as being pieces of barbaric non-senses.<br />The traditional moral discourse “The God of the Bible is morally wrong, we ought to fight Christianity, we are morally good whereas religious people are wicked and so on and so forth” seems to me to be completely flawed because it involves the existence of spooky moral absolutes which have no place in a scientific view of the world.<br />I really appreciate the critical thinking of my fellow atheists when applied to religion but I am really sad to remark they fail to apply it to their own cherished beliefs like the existence of an objective morality.Dumb_Houndhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03859275133848539125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-37130007706778489922010-01-14T06:19:28.465-05:002010-01-14T06:19:28.465-05:00The problem of this argument is the following:
As ...The problem of this argument is the following:<br />As I have said, no moral system can be grounded by mere logic or factual analysis alone, at some point moral intuitions (due to Evolution) are always going to come into play.<br />Take for example the possibility of torturing a baby just for fun: almost every human being would react with disgust and say it is wrong. Neuroscience has proven that such reaction does not stem from a rational consideration of all facts but rather from instinctive gut feelings.<br />Afterwards, people try to rationalize their belief by backing them up with arguments and mistakenly think they feel this disgust because of their reasoning although it is the other way around.<br />Based on rigorous experiments in the field of neuroscience, Jonathan Haidt shows that in the case of moral reasoning, people always begin by getting a strong emotional reaction, and only seek a posteriori to justify this reaction. He has named this phenomenon ‘the emotional dog and its rational tail’: http://faculty.virginia.edu/haidtlab/articles/haidt.emotionaldog.manuscript.pdf<br />And since one can not derive an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’, there is no way to prove that ‘one ought to not torture a baby for the fun’ by a reasoning based on fact alone, at one moment or an other , one is forced to appeal to emotions.<br />For example, saying to a intelligent lizard they ought no to do that because the baby is cute, because he is innocent, because he has an entire life before him would completely beg the question for our intelligent alien, which would then ask: “why does the baby’s beauty, innocence, or the fact he has still many years to live implies one ought not to kill the baby ?”. After one or two hours of circular reasoning, the honest human would be coerced to recognize it is so because these things sounds intuitively bad for him.Dumb_Houndhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03859275133848539125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-81416354736111038882010-01-14T06:18:58.258-05:002010-01-14T06:18:58.258-05:00Let me now develop the first point: there is an ex...Let me now develop the first point: there is an extremely great number (perhaps even an infinity) of planets where intelligent beings like us could have evolved. Given the huge dimension of the sample, it is more than likely that many such intelligent beings have evolved conceptions of morality which would appear completely disgusting to us.<br />Imagine for example a species of giant lizards ( or whatever else if you’ve more imagination than I :) who were shaped by natural selection to value power, violence , selfishness in so far that it remains compatible with the interests of the group. When invading a city and killing or enslaving all its inhabitants, their brain generate a warm feeling of happiness, satisfaction.<br />When however confronted with weakness among their own folk, they feel an overwhelming indignation, anger, rage which lead them to kill the individual guilty of failure , and after having done that, their brain awards them with an intense feeling of pleasure.<br />Now imagine such beings arrive at our earth and conclude based on their evolutionary intuitions that it would be moral and perfectly good to enslave all human beings capable of working and to kill all others.<br />What would an human atheist and moral realist say to these lizards? Do they ought to behave in a way coherent with the moral intuitions they have and slaughter or enslave all humans ?<br />My contention is that it would be completely impossible to show to these creatures that killing innocent beings is wrong: all moral systems developed by humans which would justify this conclusion can not be deduced from the mere consideration of natural facts , they all crucially depend on one or several moral intuitions , which are not shared by the intelligent lizards, so there would be no common ground upon which one could argue that something is right or wrong.<br />Now, a defender of godless moral realism could agree with me it is fallacious to rely on evolution to define an objective morality in the same way it would be fallacious to rely on the commandments of a deity. But he could then argue that there exists a moral standard independent of Evolution upon which moral realism would be based.Dumb_Houndhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03859275133848539125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-2373268500296945692010-01-14T06:18:04.884-05:002010-01-14T06:18:04.884-05:00Hi, I am an atheist, I know beyond every possible ...Hi, I am an atheist, I know beyond every possible doubt that there is neither God nor afterlife.<br />I think that belief in God can not provide us with an objective morality, as clearly shown by the Euthyphro dilemma : is something good just because God stipulated it is (in which case it is arbitrary, for God could state one ought to love ones foes as well as ordering the slaughter of the folks of Canaan. ) or did God ordered it because it is good (in which case there exists an objective standard of goodness independent of God) ?<br />However, I believe that the same challenge could be posed to any form of atheistic moral realism.<br />Over the past decades, numerous discoveries in neurology and evolutionary psychology have shown beyond any reasonable doubt that our moral intuitions ultimately stem from the shaping of our brain by evolution and that WITHOUT any such emotional intuition, no moral system can be built from reason alone.<br />This is well illustrated by the study of the brains of psychopaths: since they lack the moral emotions, they don’t consider as true most fundamental moral principles (like avoiding to create suffering, trying to promote the happiness of others) although they are quite able to reason well.<br />This shows the truth of David Hume’s famous principle that moral truths are the projection of our gut’s feelings on an indifferent and cruel reality : since one can not derive an “ought” from an “is”, moral truths are the expression of our emotions which we mistakenly consider as features of the objective reality.<br />No moral system can be created without the appeal to at least one kind of intuitions, the brute facts of nature never lead to moral duties and obligations.<br />Now, I want to state a version of the Euthyphro dilemma which shows the impossibility of defining an objective atheistic morality: is something good just because Evolution hardwired this conviction into us (in which case it is arbitrary, for Evolution could have lead us to believe that murder and torture are right ) or did Evolution produce our current beliefs because they are good (in which case there exists an objective standard of goodness independent of Evolution) ?Dumb_Houndhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03859275133848539125noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-54059299154959702422009-12-27T00:04:34.775-05:002009-12-27T00:04:34.775-05:00Logan, if you are only interested in your half of ...Logan, if you are only interested in your half of the discussion and have already decided that I couldn't possibly advance the discussion and offer legitimate counterpoints, then I have much better conversations where I will focus my energy with more interested parties.<br /><br />So in light of your lack of interest in what I have to say, I'm not even bothering to read your two part response beyond the last posts that I just glimpsed.<br /><br />You can do things that way if you want, but it only highlights your own insulation against possible challenges.<br /><br />I value my time and won't waste it.Rob Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08937716910001145836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-40715179043667480342009-12-26T02:06:33.367-05:002009-12-26T02:06:33.367-05:00I'll let you have the last word Rob.
Just lett...I'll let you have the last word Rob.<br />Just letting you know that I'm moving on to other things so you don't feel like you've accomplished something when i don't respond.Logan Creshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07467927148395179057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-32505223678629671852009-12-26T01:47:45.097-05:002009-12-26T01:47:45.097-05:002000?
it should have been ~1650 years ago, but yo...2000? <br />it should have been ~1650 years ago, but you get my point.Logan Creshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07467927148395179057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-2301817010856246442009-12-26T01:45:32.071-05:002009-12-26T01:45:32.071-05:00Hi rob,
your ignorance and arrogance is laughable....Hi rob,<br /><b><i>your ignorance and arrogance is laughable.</i></b><br />Especially when we consider you're defending a single set of accumulated data that stopped being updated 2000 years ago instead of taking on newer data sets that are actively being updated and are more efficiently minimizing harm in the world. <br /><br />When the newer data disconfirms the older data, you have more successful outcomes by going with the newer data.<br /><br />No adam? No atonement? Paul had a neurological pathology that gave him typical symptoms of a neurological pathology but he misinterpreted it using his 2000 year old knowledge base? <br /><br />No problem, I can still see why it is not in my best interest to murder people, steal from them, have sex outside of marriage, yada, yada, yada.<br />namely because of the naturally occurring consequences here and now. The same "sacred" logic that underlies hindu and buddhist beliefs.Logan Creshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07467927148395179057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-77724277468427254762009-12-26T01:18:21.282-05:002009-12-26T01:18:21.282-05:00hi rob part 2,
Or either scripture or morality has...hi rob part 2,<br /><b><i>Or either scripture or morality has not been properly and fully understood. </i></b><br />you come closer to making predictions and understanding morality by using the model of iterative games in game theory.<br /><br /><b><i>You may disagree, but you'd be begging the question to insist scripture is immoral without realizing that what is moral is itself a topic of disagreement.</i></b><br />There you go saying blatently stupid things again.<br />Just because it a topic of disagreement doesnt' mean you can't use it. But I'm sure you know this but are just too stubborn to admit when you are wrong, or that you are not up to the caliber of debate that you expect of others.<br /><br />There are moral principles that span domains, most cultures of the world have similar moral standards INDEPENDENT of Gods. Therefore, god is not required except as a sort of "big brother" video surveillance when the person doesn't understand the logic behind minimizing harm, especially in a group. <br /><br /><b><i>that scripture is trustworthy is not something that is always obvious and explicit but for Christians functions as a trajectory for studying.,</i></b><br />There is no question in your mind that scripture is not trustworthy. There is no, "hmmmm, god telling people to rip the babies out of mothers tummies doesn't sound like something i'd expect god to say. Maybe I should look into where that came from before I put all my eggs in that basket".<br /><br />like I said, i'm sure you'd scoff at hindu vedas and upanishad, the quran and LDS scriptures for the same resons you should be scoffing at the bible.<br /><br />look the NT is not independent of the OT. Its the same god, just a reinterpretation, and 'recycling' for use in another culture.<br /><br /><b><i>The God of Abraham, Moses, David Jesus. the one about which disagreements arise which doesn't mean we have a different God.</i></b><br />silly boy,<br />I'm talking about Vishnu.<br />you have no idea do you.<br />There's a world out there on the other side of the ocean that contain billions of people, that is very different from you, and doesn't give a flip about "the god of abraham", yet they are as convinced as you that they are on the right track.<br /><br />your ignorance and arrogance is laughable.<br />;-)<br />no offense intended.<br /><br />ever wonder why people here call you 'the answer man'? It because you just pull crap out of your a$$ smear it on the screen and think its a coherent answer.Logan Creshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07467927148395179057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-14132508912168010992009-12-26T01:09:57.308-05:002009-12-26T01:09:57.308-05:00hi rob,
Hi Rob,
what does
It's part of the pos...hi rob,<br />Hi Rob,<br />what does<br /><b><i>It's part of the post modern situation.</i></b><br />mean?<br /><br /><b><i>And the fact is, there are no doubt degrees.</i></b><br />maybe to you, but the to the rest of us there is. <br />it even turns up in our language<br />"gaining trust"<br />There is even a mechanism for using it in justice systems, <br />we have to convince a judge or jury to come to a conclusion based on how their belief has changed with regard to evidence.<br /><br />but I suspect that your are just argumentative. However, if you're going to be argumentative you might as well try to avoid non-sense. Unless you don't realize non-sense when you see it, as you seem to have asserted here<br /><b><i>If I suffer it, you cannot demonstrate it to me</i></b><br /><br /><b><i>Some people can't seem to understand that differences in denominations only reflect not a complete lack of truth but is perfectly coherent with the idea that central truths may indeed be understood and others represent that which we must progress towards.</i></b><br />Okay, so you admit that religion, and I suppose in your case that christianity is fundamentally incoherent right now and you need to work to make sense of it.<br /><br />But when are you going to realize that you can't do it with the bible and interpreting scripture? You can never get the "truth" out of ambiguous information, that's why it is a poor practice to use ambiguous information when doing anything important, such as diagnosing disease, or assessing guilt, or doing taxes.<br /><br />Just imagine if the tax laws were as ambiguous as the bible. You wouldn't want to tolerate it for a minute, i'm sure, and you wouldn't defend it so forcefully.<br /><br />You are not applying principles of trustworthy information across domains buddy.<br /><br /><b><i>And for an epistemically finite people such as us, diversity even on these grounds is not a bad thing but contributes to the possibility that some solutions may more redily occur to some and not others and yet all may advance in that direction.</i></b><br />what you are defending is a situation where it is not possible to come up with any baseline set of knowledge to ever start to make progress. As evidenced by the fact that christianity still can't figure out if you are saved before you are born, saved by grace or works, or all three after 2000 years.<br /><br />you kneed a baseline to start with. each denomination has a baseline? then each denominations is a different religion, with the same idol. A little dead guy on a stick.Logan Creshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07467927148395179057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-27429683565928335822009-12-25T23:53:56.183-05:002009-12-25T23:53:56.183-05:00ismellarat said... "Well, God bless you, Rob ...ismellarat said... "Well, God bless you, Rob R.<br />And God bless you too, Gandolf.<br />God bless us, everyone.<br /><br />And may the Ghosts of Christmases Past, Present, and Future be kind to us all. Sniff, sniff..."<br /><br />My friend Smelly Rat ...Im sorry the clash of words is upsetting.I dont like it either really,but like many things it has its good reasons as well as bad reasons.<br /><br />The thing is the way i see it is we can either sweet talk on an on forever and still get no where! and still be left dealing with the many problems! faith causes,or we can simply get right down to it! and start really fucking sorting it out once and for all.<br /><br />May the fairy god mother bless you to ismellarat ..Oh and may your table be laid full by the works of the FSM<br /><br />Hope you are having great end of year celebrations.Gandolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624178234332819107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-86099557882422769422009-12-25T23:42:11.304-05:002009-12-25T23:42:11.304-05:00Rob R -->"continuing down a fruitless path...Rob R -->"continuing down a fruitless path of treating all religion as equal, and again, a general skill in how to think about these things. "<br /><br />No there you go again twisting matters.I did NOT say i treat all religion as equal in the sense you are trying to depict i said it, at all.<br /><br />Im just not interested in bullshitting around squabbling over what religion might be worse than the other etc .You Christian get into that silly biggoted childish shit! of trying to claim high ground over Islam or whoever etc,and its bloody childish and achieves little in my thinking.If any thing it causes some faiths to feel picked on!,in turn only making matters worse!.<br /><br />Yes i do use a wide brush because my opinion is its the adult thing to do as its the "universal" ignorance of mere "superstitious faith" thats the real problem,and for that part! it dont matter who i paint as all faith no matter what should be held partly responsible for some of the (presense) of such stupid ignorant "superstitious faith" in our world.Witch burnings alone prove the stupidy and danger of superstitions,and superstitions have caused many more problems than just witch burnings over the many years on our planet.All faithful have played a part in promotion of superstition even in the sense it was passed on by their forefathers,therefore i use a wide brush .<br /><br />Rob R -->"for several reasons having to do with how he decides to treat someone when he is frustrated "<br /><br />I will not simply sit back peacefully forever, while some poncy snobby git who cant deal with my arguments, and even twists what i say! because it happens to be "him" that cant really even understand logic and reasoning,starts feeling the need to bitch and pick at "my" education.<br /><br />However my anger hasnt got anything at all to do with any grudge.Its got everything to do with knowing i dont need to simply take shit from some poncing bigoted fool,who bitches about peoples education!.Fair enough?<br /><br />Logan -->"Some people, no matter how educated they are, just stay idiots, don't you think?"<br /><br />Damm right Logan...I have met many educated idiots and even have a brother whos a lawyer and would argue black was white all day until the cows come home.He is educated for sure and has been able to become a lawyer.<br /><br />But when it comes to using common sense and reasoning he`s a fucking idiot,and has proved it so! many times over.For instance he dont even know when to simply stop being a argumentive dick head, and finds it hard to ever admit actually being wrong.Gandolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624178234332819107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-40520689029677197592009-12-25T16:09:39.740-05:002009-12-25T16:09:39.740-05:00God bless us, everyone.
And a Christmas goose for...<em>God bless us, everyone.</em><br /><br />And a Christmas goose for everyone!Rob Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08937716910001145836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-5631079660707730902009-12-25T16:08:10.006-05:002009-12-25T16:08:10.006-05:00There is a difference being able to store informat...<em>There is a difference being able to store information and being able to reason functionally.<br />some people call dysrationalia "lack of common sense" but basically its the inability to recognize when to apply and use logical reasoning schemes across domains.</em><br /><br />Isn't it? It's part of the post modern situation. If I suffer it, you cannot demonstrate it to me and if you suffer it, you cannot demonstrate it. And the fact is, there are no doubt degrees.<br /><br /><em>Some people can't seem to see that religion is incoherent in its own domain, demonstrated by the fundamental differences in fundamental tenets between denominations, (and not just christianity).</em><br /><br />Some people can't seem to understand that differences in denominations only reflect not a complete lack of truth but is perfectly coherent with the idea that central truths may indeed be understood and others represent that which we must progress towards.<br /><br />And for an epistemically finite people such as us, diversity even on these grounds is not a bad thing but contributes to the possibility that some solutions may more redily occur to some and not others and yet all may advance in that direction. And we certainly see this in Christianity. In some ways for example, Catholicism moved towards the thinking of many protestants in Vatican II.<br /><br /><em>you all minimize the role god played in it because it is so obviously morally corrupt.</em><br /><br />Or either scripture or morality has not been properly and fully understood. After all, there is a failure to understand the moral developement in the scripture that becomes a bit more individualistic (not completely) and becomes more grace oriented while the old still teaches moral truths though we are no longer under it. An example is of course the death penalty for adultry which is no longer called for in the New Testament with the opportunity of grace and redemption and yet, it teaches that the value of sexuality and marital relationships goes to the heart of the the value of life itself. You may disagree, but you'd be begging the question to insist scripture is immoral without realizing that what is moral is itself a topic of disagreement.<br /><br /><em>See at that point, it can't really be called divinely inspired or trustworthy.</em><br /><br />that scripture is trustworthy is not something that is always obvious and explicit but for Christians functions as a trajectory for studying.<br /><br /><em>God? Which God? You wouldn't know which god if someone you trusted didn't tell you.</em><br /><br />The God of Abraham, Moses, David Jesus. the one about which disagreements arise which doesn't mean we have a different God. That's just a mistake about how identity works.Rob Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08937716910001145836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-11561677380239967942009-12-25T11:46:44.466-05:002009-12-25T11:46:44.466-05:00Hi Rob,
There is a difference being able to store ...Hi Rob,<br />There is a difference being able to store information and being able to reason functionally.<br />some people call dysrationalia "lack of common sense" but basically its the inability to recognize when to apply and use logical reasoning schemes across domains.<br /><br />Some people, no matter how educated they are, just stay idiots, don't you think?<br /><br />Some people can't seem to see that religion is incoherent in its own domain, demonstrated by the fundamental differences in fundamental tenets between denominations, (and not just christianity). <br /><br />You all anchor your believes in 2000 year old texts that are supposed to be originated by god, but when it comes right down to it, you all minimize the role god played in it because it is so obviously morally corrupt. You blame people for the problems in DIVINELY INSPIRED text. <br /><br />See at that point, it can't really be called divinely inspired or trustworthy.<br /><br />God? Which God? You wouldn't know which god if someone you trusted didn't tell you.Logan Creshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07467927148395179057noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-38148030191257227402009-12-25T11:44:23.426-05:002009-12-25T11:44:23.426-05:00Well, God bless you, Rob R.
And God bless you too,...Well, God bless you, Rob R.<br />And God bless you too, Gandolf.<br />God bless us, everyone.<br /><br />And may the Ghosts of Christmases Past, Present, and Future be kind to us all. Sniff, sniff...ismellarathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01798650524118603772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-82147875138429653132009-12-25T11:11:54.125-05:002009-12-25T11:11:54.125-05:00Well bless you Ismellarat. Blessed are the peacem...Well bless you Ismellarat. Blessed are the peacemakers after all.<br /><br />I won't hold a grudge at Gandolf but I just don't see fruit in continueing discussion with him for several reasons having to do with how he decides to treat someone when he is frustrated (last couple of posts a case in point), continuing down a fruitless path of treating all religion as equal, and again, a general skill in how to think about these things. Even there, I'm not going to insist that I'm perfect model in that regard, but it has become a fairly substantial problematic issue between us. Of course other Christians will continue to discuss the issues with him and may do better and offend him less than I have.<br /><br />Merry Christmas.Rob Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08937716910001145836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-31381284435771544222009-12-25T09:56:58.815-05:002009-12-25T09:56:58.815-05:00Now, now, Rob R and Gandolf, it's Christmas, s...Now, now, Rob R and Gandolf, it's Christmas, so let's rejoice in the common ground we have. It's so much larger than you may think it is.<br /><br />All three of us have problems with at least parts of the Bible. Rob R has the fewest, although he won't admit to having any yet, I have a few more, and Gandolf a few more than me. <br /><br />We're just different shades of gray, and I'm sure any omnipotent god will know that none of us really accepts the whole package. He also would know that practically the entire congregation at the church I went to yesterday will only publicly proclaim the "good parts," much as many may still enjoy hearing themselves say they believe it all.<br /><br />If there's any truth to this, either most of the church and virtually all of the rest of us are going to Hell, or our differences just won't matter so much and we'll be judged mostly on how we treated our fellow human beings. I've often thought what I discovered Ed Babinski also has been pointing out - that "Christians" these days would have been considered to be liberals in earlier times.ismellarathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01798650524118603772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-25531103834715225662009-12-24T22:46:53.682-05:002009-12-24T22:46:53.682-05:00The chains of that cult grip you to this day color...The chains of that cult grip you to this day coloring your world and all your skepticism makes no difference as it offers no healing. You could claim otherwise, but what I read speaks the truth of it.<br /><br />You can follow me around Gandolf. I am happy for you to read what I write even if you must follow it with a rant.<br /><br />May you find healing, and merry Christmas to you.Rob Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08937716910001145836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-17701773481595093272009-12-24T16:51:05.979-05:002009-12-24T16:51:05.979-05:00Oh what ever Rob R mr answer man with fucking usel...Oh what ever Rob R mr answer man with fucking useless answers.<br /><br />Your fucking education dont impress me...Many folks with educations (do impress me) a whole lot...But seems some folks can still have a education and yet in many ways can still be fucking real ignorant ... You prove that point!, that common sense is also very important too and sadly seems you just aint got fuck all of it!.<br /><br />I`ll be around next time Rob R. And didnt you hear me (i dont allow you any dominion) over me i dont recognize your supposed athourity that you try tactics of imposing your supposed rules of the game on me.And thats really what you just cant handle hmmm?,you just not used to it.You can say, Scott this ,that,blah blah or whatever you like...But i`ll still be here ready for you each time Rob R ...And if i see you elswhere i wont be shying away with any fear of your supposed hob nob snob education.....I ll be comming right at you with logic and common sense if i feel you aint really using much of it ...whether you fucking like it or not<br /><br />I dont mind if each time you gotta run away like a baby,bleating about it or whatever.Thats your problem.<br /><br />Because of fucking the bullshit of religion yeah i got a hard time in school the whole way through it,i was persecuted because i was unluckily to "born" to a bunch of fucking dick head christians folks of faith and their silly moronic superstitions and ignorance and bigotry.The selfrightious law of their christian cult made us kids have to act bigoted at school,and so other folks were right in dislikeing us because it was ignorant self rightous and bigoted to have such moronic faith laws.It was hard to concentrate at school the other kids hated us,and then i also had my family splitting apart at the seams all around me through separation and excommunication issues to think endlessly about and worry like fuck about as well.<br /><br />Incidently they held me back even early on in my schooling at the primary level.This further compounded the abuse i recieved all the way further along the line in school from there on.<br /><br />I had family around me disappearing through excommunication etc,left right and centre.I had all sorts of crazy shit lunatic religious christian cult shit happening that i experienced, like for instance finding my own brother in the process of trying to join many others in the group, who commit suicide.<br /><br />No i simply admit i didnt get the education of a scholar Rob,and i left the cult (aged 15) which meant needing to (leave home) find a (job a place to live) simply so i could (look after myself).<br /><br />There was no mummy and daddy or even sister or bro in my life,nobody washing my wee undies for me Rob sending me off to some university or what ever.<br /><br />Yes my education is basically the school of hard knocks.Make your mistakes.Get experience. Learn to use logic and common sense or dont survive.<br /><br />So fucking what.<br /><br />I will still be around Rob R,and your snobbery of education dont scare me off AT ALL my friend....Ive needed to learn to deal with way more scary folk than you in my life Rob ...That i can promise you<br /><br />Merry Christmas sunshineGandolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624178234332819107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-77395326436809261492009-12-24T14:03:13.970-05:002009-12-24T14:03:13.970-05:00No what irrational is you suggesting, faith can be...<em>No what irrational is you suggesting, faith can be equal to race.Thats fucking irrational,and downright moronic.</em><br /><br />Well Gandolf, I see no reason to continue this further. I didn't even bother to read this further because at a glance, it's more of the same. again, go get a text book on logic and philosophy and get some idea of how these things are done. You won't take lessons in reasoning from me and brother, you need them badly. Without some skill you just have no capability here.<br /><br />There is especially little fruit in this when you decide to take your fundamentalist upbringing out on me.<br /><br />Seriously Gandolf, I know the yes men here pat you on the back, but it is more worthy of my time to discuss these things with others. I have had many worth while discussions here. Scott above has provided a better discussion than you are capable of. But when the discussion quality with a particular person persists who isn't able to adapt to the discussion, advance the discussion and take things in context, it's time to shake the dust off my feet and move on.<br /><br />I know you are impressed with your ranting and insulting skills, but reasoning is serious business and it doesn't help you at all here.Rob Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08937716910001145836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-13892743355212547972009-12-24T00:42:15.012-05:002009-12-24T00:42:15.012-05:00post 3
Rob -->"okay, what biological jour...post 3<br /><br />Rob -->"okay, what biological journal, textbook or researcher says this?"<br /><br />Do you think it unlikely?..If so prove it....Im not bothering with playing your special "rule" games Rob...Im pretty sure my opinion is a pretty safe opinion...Im happy to leave it up to the common sense of other folks reading to decide.And whats more im sure if you had reason or proof to prove me wrong ..you would likely have used it double quick ....I read faithful folks like a book Rob ...i know inside out their bullshit games they often try playing.<br /><br />Which is why discussing matters with people like Grace that posts on this forum,is like a breath of fresh air ..She dont try playing manipulative bullshit word/rule games<br /><br />Rob -->"can play a survival role as well"<br /><br />Yes im fully aware of that.<br /><br />Rob -->"Well then, we shouldn't have any misery because it should've been deselected"<br /><br />No not nessarily...One thing being helpful factor, doesnt stop other stuff such as superstition/faith also playing a part in the factor of the overall mix.<br /><br />Rob -->"There is no contradiction between change and transcendence"<br /><br />No maybe not..But explain change in supposed (supernatural) trancendence .Do the gods get it wrong?.<br /><br />Rob -->" But as I said, it doesn't all change anyway. there is a consistent core of which the old law teaches."<br /><br />Oh yes lets remember the "core" ...What a bloody lame excuse<br /><br />The only thing i see that seems very consistant core, Rob. Is uneducated ignorance pride manipulation superstition and fucking blatent bullshitGandolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624178234332819107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-70938823556213066882009-12-24T00:20:02.883-05:002009-12-24T00:20:02.883-05:00post 2
Rob -->"the negative examples you ...post 2<br /><br />Rob -->"the negative examples you cite like killing witches just has no place in Christianity as described by the new testament"<br /><br />Oh more of the stupid no true Scotsman ,christian faithful bullshit.Not true christian says guru christian Rob,just like some other bullshitting christian is likely saying in return about old Rob .. Not that a slow christian like Rob will understand the problem in any real hurry....Its a matter of faith over matter for cherry picking Rob..<br /><br />The utter git cannot see that it dont matter so much whether the translations were right or wrong rah rah rah ...The fact remain either way ...These faith books still ARE far to often full of myths and confusion and nasty violent divisive suggestive material...And right or wrong translations of such false fictional material being taught as truth, STILL DOES cause much harm.<br /><br />Rob -->" And we aren't under the old testament which made witchcraft a capital offense, though it is a valuable teaching to us to realize the serious gravity and evil that is involved in real witchcraft."<br /><br />Still that doesnt change the danger aspect of these books.While you translate the idiotic confusion one way,others disagree with you ..And happen to translate it to still include witch killings.<br /><br />Now open your eyes Rob ...Children blood killed as witches in the year fucking 2009/2010 ...lays on your hands too Rob ...You cannot simply totally separate the harm caused ...by simple use of your selfish pitiful excuses of translation etc...It still the book you promote as truth, causing part of the problem.<br /><br />Rob -->"You bring the accusation, ergo you bring the evidence."<br /><br />Oh and you think i still allow christian fuckwhits to have dominion over me Rob ?..Get real mate im here and i still will be here saying it like i see it ...Whether dick heads like you happen to like it or not.<br /><br />Rob -->"Any one can take any view and distort it into something with horrible consequences and if that reflects back on the original view, then there is no truth we can trust since people have done horrible things with atheism and naturalistic evolution."<br /><br />Nice try but no thats just an excuse...You still havent change the fact that (harmfully suggestive material) contained withing the actual faith beliefs,is what is the actual cause of whats (helping folks) to do what they do...Its the faith that still has (suggestive material) in its WRITTEN TEACHINGS ,of NASTY ABUSIVE witch killing and shunning and excommunications etc etc etc.<br /><br />What does "Jeffrey Dommer (sp?)" have to do with it .You convieniantly forget! he was also a fucking mentally retarded psychopathic madman.Gandolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624178234332819107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-72773907282993688362009-12-23T23:53:17.670-05:002009-12-23T23:53:17.670-05:00Post 1.
Rob -->"it's not an injustice...Post 1.<br /><br />Rob -->"it's not an injustice. it's irrational. It's rationally equivalent to racism"<br /><br />No what irrational is you suggesting, faith can be equal to race.Thats fucking irrational,and downright moronic.<br /><br />When folks suggest tobacco shouldnt be promoted,do you bleat and cry.."oh but thats simply racism"<br /><br />Rob -->"The analogy is only as good as it's reflection of reality and this isn't it. Sorry but what abominable practices of Islam or nationalistic Hindus reflects nothing on Christianity. You analogy doesn't fit since what Christians say doesn't provide the ultimate source for the brutality of the others"<br /><br />Yeah well so far personally i think you have failed to prove its not quite a decent analogy.The abominable practices of Islam etc,are connected to christianity by the fact all are connected to being faiths/myths, that taught as reality and truth do often cause many of much the same problems.<br /><br />Rob -->"As for corrupt behavior by Christians themselves, there is free will and understanding."<br /><br />No i disagree.Im my opinion your conclusion is only a biased bigoted false conclusion as per usual from you.You simply foolishly over look the fact its not all about free will at all Rob.Quite conveniantly you simply over look the barbaric ignorant bullshit teachings within these abusivly written faiths,that being so fucking confusing and devoid of educated intelligence ...Often LEADS PEOPLE up the fucking gum tree...causing all manner of nasty idiotic foolishness and abuse in the process. <br /><br />Rob -->"The analogy further fails because the effect of smoking is only unhealthy"<br /><br />No once again you are not quite correct.Smoking can actually produce a calming effect for some folks.Smoking tobacco i was told by one dentist,can actually slow down tooth decay.Smoking can actually help some folks put on less weight.etc.<br /><br />Rob -->"It is an undeniable historical fact that Christianity has brought about positive social change from the improvements in England in the time of Wesley, the opposition of communism in the east (it was a Christian prayer vigil in Germany that instigated the toppling of the Berlin Wall) to the opposition of slavery and overthrow of apartheid. It's a selective history that refuses to acknowledge the positive changes from religion."<br /><br />I do not discount that christianity has been involved in much change that happened.How could it not be a factor, when it liturally near took over our societies.And by shear force of numbers,naturally shows up in statistics.However that doesnt prove that humans (undivided by very many devisive worldwide faith beliefs),wouldnt have been able to maybe have obtained many of the same things without experiencing the devise nature of superstitious faiths.<br /><br />Rob -->"And the metaphor of painting with broad brushstrokes is about the reckless thinking of someone who applies generalities that were not well thought out and in fact contradicts the facts as you do."<br /><br />And your skinny bigoted biased selective brush strokes you prefer using, are about as smart as some hairy ased school child, trying to put the blame on everything else but the root of the actual problem.. Where with use of any decent honesty and justice ...The blame might truthfully actually belong.<br /><br />Still gamblers are known to often be thoughtless selfish pricks...Why should i expect those who gamble on salvation to be any different ?.Gandolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02624178234332819107noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21219785.post-62356508025006092242009-12-23T13:19:05.845-05:002009-12-23T13:19:05.845-05:00post 2 of 2
In my opinion it seems to me that a...post 2 of 2<br /><br /><br /><br /><em>In my opinion it seems to me that any/all faiths/superstitions that are even (prone) to producing (sub cults and devisions shunnings and devides etc),could in all decent honesty very justly deserve to be considdered as just as nasty and abusive also.</em><br /><br />Any one can take any view and distort it into something with horrible consequences and if that reflects back on the original view, then there is no truth we can trust since people have done horrible things with atheism and naturalistic evolution. Jeffrey Dommer (sp?) credited his view of evolution for his moral anti-realism that allowed him to do the horrible things that he did.<br /><br /><em>Why not?.Holistic happiness plays a big part in survival.</em><br /><br />okay, what biological journal, textbook or researcher says this?<br /><br />If the whole groups happy!<br /><br /><em>If the whole groups happy! morales in general are higher which produces better proformance,hence everyone benefits.</em><br /><br />Well then, we shouldn't have any misery because it should've been deselected. But the fact is fear and misery and dissatisfaction can play a survival role as well. All of these motivate us against dangerous or sub par survival situations. And too much happiness can lead to complacency.<br /><br /><em>Its possible part of survival is also the fact that the groups that are better adapted holistically, will naturally be more likely to survive better.</em><br /><br />it's possible and it's possibly not true. This is a faith claim which I doubt has been scientifically substantiated. This is not a good position for one who wants morality in a world view that puts a premium on eliminating the need for faith.<br /><br /><em>Ohh and Rob how much does it say about the original "transendance" of morals,if you agree the supposed transendental morals can be seen to have actually had to have to change.Really kinda proves they obviously cant really have ever been that supernaturally transendental at all anyway can they.</em><br /><br />Why's that. i don't see why this is true at all. There is no contradiction between change and transcendence. But as I said, it doesn't all change anyway. there is a consistent core of which the old law teaches. It teaches us the value of innocent human life, our responsibility for the lives of those under our care, sexuality, community, worship and so on. This has not changed, but how we promote those values has in an age of greater grace.Rob Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08937716910001145836noreply@blogger.com