Note that prior I didn't say such a person would, I said he lacks certain beliefs that would make him more likely able to rationalize his act. 
Posted on 12/28/2006 4:15:11 PM PST by quesney
In nearly every interview about my book, Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism,I am asked whether I am an atheist or an agnostic. The bias--a profoundly American bias--implicit in this question is that only an "unbeliever" would want to write a historical work about the secular influences on the founding and development of our nation.
[...]
What we ought to be talking about are decent human values that can be subscribed to by Americans of any faith or no faith. I could not care less whether any elected official believes in God: I care about what he or she does on earth. As an atheist, I believe precisely what the Bible says on this subject: "By their fruits ye shall know them."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.washingtonpost.com ...
Or even hints they might not be God given.
What about someone who is a self-proclaimed agnostic but has a voting record and personal morals that match up with yours?
Note that prior I didn't say such a person would, I said he lacks certain beliefs that would make him more likely able to rationalize his act.
The very concept of rights is founded in religion.
Since the enlightened person is freed from any superstitions about some "God," they are free from having to worry about "rights." Only raw power counts and humans are just meat puppets for the powerful.
Look at this puppet on a string...
http://pandachute.com/videos/leaked_saddam_being_hung_video
The very concept of rights is founded in religion.
Since the enlightened person is freed from any superstitions about some "God," they are free from having to worry about "rights." Only raw power counts and humans are just meat puppets for the powerful.
Look at this puppet on a string...
http://pandachute.com/videos/leaked_saddam_being_hung_video
I knew it! You really are a commie!
As for me, well...
Historically that may be true. But rights are not logically dependent on religion in the least. Rights are dependent on the requirements of human nature. Humans require individual rights in order to thrive. And setting up a world where we can thrive is the whole point of having a system of morality in the first place.
Since the enlightened person is freed from any superstitions about some "God," they are free from having to worry about "rights." Only raw power counts and humans are just meat puppets for the powerful.
No, all we need to be moral is to understand the difference between short term and long term consequences of our actions. One needs to be able to think in terms of principles, and not just in ad-hoc, spur of the moment horizons. This has nothing to do with whether there's a supernatural father-figure out there with a supernatural switch ready to take us to the supernatural woodshed if we disobey whatever rules he happened to think up.
Look at this puppet on a string... http://pandachute.com/videos/leaked_saddam_being_hung_video
What - are you saying you think the execution of Saddam was a BAD thing??? That the Iraqis were treating Saddam like a meat puppet??? Please, do walk us through your logic here. I expect it will be... delightfully esoteric. ;-)
Nope.
It was Thomas Henry Huxley, Aldous' grandfather.
Morality and all of its associated ideals are rooted entirely in the presupposition some higher power defines what is correct in human behavior.
The very idea that human beings have individual rights not subject to the whims of an earthly monarch, but subject to the laws of Yahweh, is directly from Moses.
In Plato's Euthyphro, Socrates advanced the argument that piety to the gods is impossible if the gods all want different things. Morality is impossible, because all humans have different morals and they are idols of human design.
Claims of morality is sophistry without some singular higher power defining what it is.
Yes, you're right. That's what relying on a faulty memory gets you. Thanks
Sure, but the "higher power" is not a person. It's the objective truth of human nature and what kinds of behavior thriving in that environment requires.
Uh-oh, I can see your fingers itching to press the cut & paste button, but please do try to respond to that in your own words this time.
Everything I write, with the exception of attributed quotes, is my own copywritten material.
It's the objective truth of human nature and what kinds of behavior thriving in that environment requires.
That is sophistry, or do you want to concede that MIGHT MAKES RIGHT ???
Claims of morality is sophistry without some singular higher power defining what it is.
Again, returning to Plato's Euthyphro, Socrates advanced the argument that piety to the gods who all want different things is impossible. Socrates exposed the pagan esoteric sophistry.
The mythical rights of men and women are meaningless.
The very concept of rights is also founded in religion.
Since the enlightened person is freed from any superstitions about some "God," they are free from having to worry about "rights." Only raw power counts and humans are just meat puppets for the powerful...
MIGHT MAKES RIGHT is your argument, not mine.
Needless to say, that's absurd.
I think you are indeed an atheist - a recent convert, in fact. But as you have stated here, you agree with theists that the only way one can justify a morality is by positing a supernatural dictator who can arbitrarily impose a moral code on everyone.
I think that, deep down, you are terrified that you've lost your intellectual trust in the concept of morality as such. You're desperately clinging to this simplistic might-makes-right construction because it's the only one you think you can logically justify, but that's going to fall apart for you pretty soon as you gain some wisdom in your real life. Besides, I'm sure you realize on some level, even this moment, that "might makes right" is absurd. And you don't believe in that deus ex machina God who could supply something that kinda-sorta looks like a stand-in for objective morality. And you can't extricate yourself from this contradiction.
And yet... you believe in morality. Against everything you think you know. Morality just... refuses... to... be... reasoned... away. Or perhaps it's that you just... viscerally... cannot... give... up... on... some... any... belief... in... morality.
I do hope that when the philosophical terror gets too much, you remember what we Objectivists have been trying to explain to you: Human nature, and the behaviors & principles that it implies are necessary in order to thrive as humans, is that objective "higher power" you're searching for that prevents enlightened self-interest from devolving into nihilistic subjectivism.
It is what you believe. I am not a "believer."
I think you are indeed an atheist -
I am not an ecumenical atheist. I am not an orthodox atheist. There are no such things.
You're desperately clinging to this simplistic might-makes-right construction because it's the only one you think you can logically justify,...
I have proven with LOGIC, as did Socrates before me; that without some singular higher power defining what is correct for human behavior, morality is an arbitrary esoteric hobgoblin, an idol of human design.
And yet... you believe in morality.
Where have I said that?
An atheist who says I am immoral is no different than a preacher or rabbi saying I am a sinner.
Morality and all of it associated ideals are rooted entirely in the presupposition some higher power defines what is correct for human behavior.
I'm sure you realize on some level, even this moment, that "might makes right" is absurd.
Dear, your Freudian slip is showing...
I do hope that when the philosophical terror gets too much, you remember what we Objectivists...
You are not gods, you just like to play them. The cult of personality that has grown up around Ayn Rand (one of my favorite writers) has become exactly like the sophists Socrates was fighting against in ancient Athens.
Human nature, and the behaviors & principles that it implies...
Proves that humans are devolving into nihilistic subjectivism.
Never mind me, logic is consistent on its own merit...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.