Atheism and humanism are completely contradictory

Author: Conservallectual

Posts

Total: 1,052
#721
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Shila
If you are a Christian the Bible teaches you what is right and wrong.
what does the bible say about the proper length of copyright extensions ?

what does the bible say about purchasing goods that utilize exploitative child labor (like chocolate and bananas) ?
#722
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Shila
If you are educated you can turn to moral philosophy. Moral philosophy is the branch of philosophy that contemplates what is right and wrong. It explores the nature of morality and examines how people should live their lives in relation to others.
kant's "moral imperative" is a pretty good guideline 

but the actual PRAXIS is still tailored to each individual

and broadly open to interpretation
#723
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
--> @Shila
If you are educated you can turn to moral philosophy. Moral philosophy is the branch of philosophy that contemplates what is right and wrong. It explores the nature of morality and examines how people should live their lives in relation to others.
kant's "moral imperative" is a pretty good guideline 

but the actual PRAXIS is still tailored to each individual

and broadly open to interpretation
That is why religions are seen as the true custodians of morality.

#724
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Shila
That is why religions are seen as the true custodians of morality.
how do i know which flavor of religion to choose ?
#725
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
That is why religions are seen as the true custodians of morality.
how do i know which flavor of religion to choose ?
If you believe dead Jews can forgive your sins pick Christianity.
If you like virgins pick Islam.
If you like your current life and want to return to it pick Hinduism.

#726
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Shila
how do i know which flavor of religion to choose ?
If you believe dead Jews can forgive your sins pick Christianity.
If you like virgins pick Islam.
If you like your current life and want to return to it pick Hinduism.
so, basically, "objective morality" boils down to "personal preference"
#727
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
That is why religions are seen as the true custodians of morality.

how do i know which flavor of religion to choose ?
If you believe dead Jews can forgive your sins pick Christianity.
If you like virgins pick Islam.
If you like your current life and want to return to it pick Hinduism.

so, basically, "objective morality" boils down to "personal preference"
You have to be objective about the religion you choose so you can abide by  its morality.

#728
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Tarik
Logic has nothing to do with where you begin
It does if your asserting the beginning to be true
I’m not. We’re talking about morality and what we use as our moral standard. There is no relevant assertion of truth involved at that point.

I assert well being as the core standard by which I judge actions against. Well being is not a truth statement, it is simply the thing I have chosen to judge actions against. You assert God. That’s not a truth statement, that’s simply the thing you have chosen to judge things against.

All of your arguments as to why God should be regarded as the standard are irrelevant to this because one still has to decide in their own subjective opinion that those arguments warrant asserting God as the standard.

So no, this has nothing to do with truth from the beginning because a moral standard is not a truth statement.

You are correct however that logic is necessarily involved once the premises of an argument are challenged. But premises can always be challenged, hence the problem of infinite regress. At some point if we want to have a conversation about anything we have to start somewhere, and at that starting point logic would have no application because logic is necessarily the middle point, never the starting point.
#729
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@Stephen
I cannot read your mind princess.
No? But you can read other things I say right? Well if you read from the beginning you would know the context.
#730
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@Double_R
Well being is not a truth statement, it is simply the thing I have chosen to judge actions against.
But that just begs the question as to why you chose well being as a standard if you didn’t believe that standard to be a true standard?
#731
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Tarik
But that just begs the question as to why you chose well being as a standard if you didn’t believe that standard to be a true standard?
Because there is no such thing as a “true standard”. That is an incoherent concept, right there with a 5 sided triangle or a married bachelor.

Again, a standard is nothing more than an ideal. It is not a truth statement so it does not have a truth value.

I choose well being as my standard because that’s what I value. You choose God because that’s what you value. Values are subjective. Always have been and always will be.
#732
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@Double_R
I choose well being as my standard because that’s what I value.
Why?
#733
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 2,669
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
-->
@Double_R
You assert God. That’s not a truth statement

You choose God because that’s what you value. Values are subjective. Always have been and always will be.

If, as you claim, asserting God is not a truth statement, it's a subjectrive choice, then why do you throw a tantum and start screaming demands for burden of proof anytime someone asserts belief in God.

Rules of your illogical BOP game?  
#734
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Shila
so, basically, "objective morality" boils down to "personal preference"
You have to be objective about the religion you choose so you can abide by  its morality.
how can i be "objective about the religion i choose" ?
#735
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Double_R
Again, a standard is nothing more than an ideal. It is not a truth statement so it does not have a truth value.
bingo
#736
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Sidewalker
If, as you claim, asserting God is not a truth statement, it's a subjectrive choice, then why do you throw a tantum and start screaming demands for burden of proof anytime someone asserts belief in God.

Rules of your illogical BOP game?
Asserting God as the standard for morality, not asserting God as an existent being. If you read the exchange first you would know that.

The latter is a factual claim and therefore one which, if you believe in basic principals of logic, shoulder a burden of proof. Clearly you don’t, which is why you pretend it’s a game.
#737
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
--> @Shila
so, basically, "objective morality" boils down to "personal preference"
You have to be objective about the religion you choose so you can abide by  its morality.
how can i be "objective about the religion i choose" ?
Pick the objects you like in a religion before choosing the religion to follow. Be objective.

If you believe dead Jews can forgive your sins pick Christianity.
If you like virgins pick Islam.
If you like your current life and want to return to it pick Hinduism.

#738
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 2,669
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
-->
@Double_R
If, as you claim, asserting God is not a truth statement, it's a subjectrive choice, then why do you throw a tantum and start screaming demands for burden of proof anytime someone asserts belief in God.

Rules of your illogical BOP game?
Asserting God as the standard for morality, not asserting God as an existent being. If you read the exchange first you would know that.
I read the exchange, it's like all of your exchanges, you debate the debate rather than the subject matter of the debate, you assert your own subjective definitions of words, your own subjective logic, and usually, like in this post, you confuse epistemology with ontology.  All you ever seem to say is that these are the axioms of my faith, believe in me and don’t question it.

If you read my post, I said, asserts belief in God, and as with every exchange we've had, the difference is belief in God based on faith, it's only in your puerile game that there is a burden of proof.  

The latter is a factual claim and therefore one which, if you believe in basic principals of logic, shoulder a burden of proof. Clearly you don’t, which is why you pretend it’s a game.
Someone who asserts belief in God as a matter of faith, is making a factual claim that they believe, it's an epistemological statement, it asserts the existence of faith, your passionate fundamentalism keeps you from understanding that.  Sorry kiddie, but your special little pretend definition of atheism doesn't change the basic principles of logic, and it doesn't make you the only peron who can play the BOP card, that's just in your invented game's rule book.

You've called into question the very notion of truth by turning your claims to truth into little more than power plays, when you claim that what you say is true, all you are really doing is claiming status for beliefs that advance your fundamentalist agenda.

But as you know,  I'll be glad to formally debate your incoherent and illogical claim that faith in God carries the burden of proof.


#739
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Shila
how can i be "objective about the religion i choose" ?
Pick the objects you like in a religion before choosing the religion to follow. Be objective.

If you believe dead Jews can forgive your sins pick Christianity.
If you like virgins pick Islam.
If you like your current life and want to return to it pick Hinduism.
you've only listed SUBJECTIVE criteria
#740
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
--> @Shila
how can i be "objective about the religion i choose" ?
Pick the objects you like in a religion before choosing the religion to follow. Be objective.

If you believe dead Jews can forgive your sins pick Christianity.
If you like virgins pick Islam.
If you like your current life and want to return to it pick Hinduism.
you've only listed SUBJECTIVE criteria
They are all objective facts.
Jesus was a Jew that was killed so that sin would be forgiven.(fact)
72 virgins await every Muslim martyr in paradise.(fact)
Reincarnation is part o& the cycle of rebirths in Hinduism (fact).

Pick the objects you like in a religion before choosing the religion to follow. Be objective.
#741
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Shila
Pick the objects **you like** in a religion before choosing the religion to follow. Be objective.
Pick the objects - you like - in a religion before choosing the religion to follow. Be objective.

- you like -

this is subjective criteria

what you personally believe qualifies as a "fact" is also subjective
#742
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Shila
to further clarify

objects are objective

your PREFERENCE for objects is SUBJECTIVE
#743
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
--> @Shila
to further clarify

objects are objective

your PREFERENCE for objects is SUBJECTIVE
All religions State their objectives. I narrowed their objectives in my example to help you make an objective choice.

They are all objective facts in each religion.
Jesus was a Jew that was killed so that sin would be forgiven.(fact)
72 virgins await every Muslim martyr in paradise.(fact)
Reincarnation is part o& the cycle of rebirths in Hinduism (fact).

Pick the objects (facts) you like in a religion before choosing the religion to follow. Be objective.

#744
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Shila
Pick the objects (facts) you like in a religion before choosing the religion to follow. Be objective.
look,

i'm not disputing your claim that these individual "facts" are to be considered "objective"

i'm even assuming that means they are all "true"

but you seem to be glossing over the point that the one i "like" is going to be a purely SUBJECTIVE choice on my part

my personal preference for one "fact" over another "fact" is SUBJECTIVE

even if the "facts" themselves are considered to be "OBJECTIVE"
#745
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL
--> @Shila
Pick the objects (facts) you like in a religion before choosing the religion to follow. Be objective.
look,

i'm not disputing your claim that these individual "facts" are to be considered "objective"

i'm even assuming that means they are all "true"

but you seem to be glossing over the point that the one i "like" is going to be a purely SUBJECTIVEchoice on my part

my personal preference for one "fact" over another "fact" is SUBJECTIVE

even if the "facts" themselves are considered to be "OBJECTIVE"
Different religions offer different rewards. So it is up to the individual to consider these objective rewards and match it with their objective needs before they pick a religion.

All religions State their objectives. I narrowed their objectives in my example to help you make an objective choice.

They are all objective facts in each religion.
Jesus was a Jew that was killed so that sin would be forgiven.(fact)
72 virgins await every Muslim martyr in paradise.(fact)
Reincarnation is part o& the cycle of rebirths in Hinduism (fact).

Pick the objects (facts) you like in a religion before choosing the religion to follow. Be objective.

#746
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Sidewalker
If you read my post, I said, asserts belief in God,
And if you read the exchange your post was written in response to, you would know that this conversation has nothing to do with “asserting belief in God”. It’s about morality and for the most part God has been assumed for the sake of argument.

Context matters in communication. Take note of it and these conversations will go a lot better.

But as you know,  I'll be glad to formally debate your incoherent and illogical claim that faith in God carries the burden of proof.
I would debate this claim if I had ever made it and/or believe it. I don’t and never have. You are having a whole conversation in your head.
#747
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Double_R
-> @Sidewalker
If you read my post, I said, asserts belief in God,
And if you read the exchange your post was written in response to, you would know that this conversation has nothing to do with “asserting belief in God”. It’s about morality and for the most part God has been assumed for the sake of argument.

Context matters in communication. Take note of it and these conversations will go a lot better.

But as you know,  I'll be glad to formally debate your incoherent and illogical claim that faith in God carries the burden of proof.
I would debate this claim if I had ever made it and/or believe it. I don’t and never have. You are having a whole conversation in your head.
So why are you still arguing with Sidewalker?

#748
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Shila
So why are you still arguing with Sidewalker?
On the subway with very little service. Not really anything else to do.

#749
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Double_R
--> @Shila
So why are you still arguing with Sidewalker?
On the subway with very little service. Not really anything else to do.
So You are having a whole conversation in your head.

#750
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
They could but they won't. They're just here to vent their hatred of theistd on people they don't know so they don't lose all their family and friends.