The Irrational Atheist

WorldNetDaily ^ | 11/17/03 | Vox Day

[Tribune7]

The idea that he is a devotee of reason seeing through the outdated superstitions of other, lesser beings is the foremost conceit of the proud atheist. This heady notion was first made popular by French intellectuals such as Voltaire and Diderot, who ushered in the so-called Age of Enlightenment.

That they also paved the way for the murderous excesses of the French Revolution and many other massacres in the name of human progress is usually considered an unfortunate coincidence by their philosophical descendants.

The atheist is without God but not without faith, for today he puts his trust in the investigative method known as science, whether he understands it or not. Since there are very few minds capable of grasping higher-level physics, let alone following their implications, and since specialization means that it is nearly impossible to keep up with the latest developments in the more esoteric fields, the atheist stands with utter confidence on an intellectual foundation comprised of things of which he knows nothing.

In fairness, he cannot be faulted for this, except when he fails to admit that he is not actually operating on reason in this regard, but is instead exercising a faith that is every bit as blind and childlike as that of the most unthinking Bible-thumping fundamentalist. Still, this is not irrational, it is only ignorance and a failure of perception.

The irrationality of the atheist can primarily be seen in his actions – and it is here that the cowardice of his intellectual convictions is also exposed. Whereas Christians and the faithful of other religions have good reason for attempting to live by the Golden Rule – they are commanded to do so – the atheist does not.

In fact, such ethics, as well as the morality that underlies them, are nothing more than man-made myth to the atheist. Nevertheless, he usually seeks to live by them when they are convenient, and there are even those, who, despite their faithlessness, do a better job of living by the tenets of religion than those who actually subscribe to them.

Still, even the most admirable of atheists is nothing more than a moral parasite, living his life based on borrowed ethics.

[tpaine]

Some form of the 'golden rule' has been found in all societies that have written or oral traditions. It is a rational part of human nature, learned at infancy..

"Don't bite the teat that feeds you".

[Tribune7]

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but in any of the cases, the reason to obey seems to be that it is the most profitable choice for the believer.

If you're asking for a reason to do something it's obviously going to be answered with a suggested benefit.

Is that any different from the utilitarianism that forms the foundation of athiest ethics, as the author of the article claims?

Yes, it's different. It may not seem so, however, if you only look at the similarities -- namely that both systems make claims that specified behavior is beneficial. The difference is that the utilitarian benefits are solely material and temporal, whereas the Christian ones are spiritual and eternal.

[Hank Kerchief]

Well, I know of one group of atheists ... You're baiting people ...

See Post #22 and Post #67.

Then come back and accuse me, if you like.

Hank

[Tribune7]

"Don't bite the teat that feeds you".

That's not the Golden Rule.

[tpaine]

What is? Give us your wisdom.

[Tribune7]

Do to others as you'd have them do to you.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Do not do unto others as you would they should do unto you.
Their tastes may not be the same.

- George Bernard Shaw

[Tribune7]

Fabian socialists are always the enemy. :-)

[Alamo-Girl]

Out of curiosity, which pre-Christian ideologies supported the concept of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" based on unfailing love - no matter what the others might say or do, consistently forgiving all such offenses as if they never happened?

[Tuba-Dude]

Although well written, the author has one fact wrong: the thinkers of the Age of Reason were primarily deists, not atheists. Big difference between the two.

[Jorge]

And atheist is simply someone who disbelieves what you claim to be true without proof. So you insult him publicly and claim he’s the “arrogant" one. Nice…

The atheist insistance that God does not exist is an insanely arrogant claim.

[tpaine]

"Don't bite the teat that feeds you."


"Do to others as you'd have them do to you."
-t7-


You'd have them [your nurse] do to you. [feed you]
Thus -- Do onto others [don't bite the nurses teats] as you'd have them feed you.

Are you always this dense, t7?

[Tribune7]

Welcome to Free Republic.

Now what about atheists and agnostics? We tend to rely on science and that which can be proven.

Science says it's impossible for life to come from non-life. How did life get here?

[tpaine]

Alamo-Girl wrote:
Out of curiosity, which pre-Christian ideologies supported the concept of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" based on unfailing love - no matter what the others might say or do, consistently forgiving all such offenses as if they never happened?

---

Beats me sweetums. Hugs, and thanks for your lovely loaded questions.

[Tribune7]

You'd have them [your nurse] do to you. [feed you] Thus -- Do onto others [don't bite the nurses teats] as you'd have them feed you.

It means that your nurse should feed you -- even if there is no compensation or gain -- because she'd want someone to feed her if she were in your predicament.

Your view seems to be that the nurse shouldn't feed you -- the innocent baby -- unless she can be reasonably certain there is some material benefit to her.

Good night, Tom.

[little jeremiah]

Neither was Nietzsche.

Please justify this statement.

[Alamo-Girl]

You're quite welcome, tpaine! Thanks for the response. Hugs!

[Tribune7]

Out of curiosity, which pre-Christian ideologies supported the concept of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" based on unfailing love - no matter what the others might say or do, consistently forgiving all such offenses as if they never happened?

That was a lovely loaded question. :-)

Good night, A-G.